2008 US Elections

[UncannyGarlic]

Canadian healthcare is great until you needs specialized attention or have to wait. My aunt and cousin in Toronto had to come to the states twice and pay out of pocket and were not reimbursed. You socialize healthcare and many of those specialized doctors will cease to exist. They would never be able to pay their college loan... Or is the govt supposed to pay for that too?

Well to start with, your aunt and cousin are retarded because Canadians can get insurence for out of country coverage which covers all healthcare expenses in countries that don't have socialized health care (mostly for Canadians visiting the states). Yes the government should socialize public colleges (ie pay the bill) but really the entire education system needs an overhaul (standardized testing for every grade level before college which determines if/where a student moves onto and if/where they can get into college).

You keep giving out handouts the lazier and more stuck in a rut many will be.

Social programs are much less abused by citizens than they are by corporations like WalMart (I'd suggest watching the documentary "The High Cost of Low Prices" which has how much it costs the government and thus tax payers to pay for the social programs for WalMart that WalMart should be paying for).

The more you tax the middle and upper middle class the less charity will recieve. Fact.

Incorrect. Donations are deductable from taxes to a certain level (I think it's a percentage of taxes, but I'm not sure).

The more you tax small business and corporations... They'll just raise their fees.

Yes and no. It depends on where the taxes are going (socialized healthcare for example would reduce costs for many companies) and most corporations don't pay nearly as much as is on paper due to the excessive number of loopholes and work arounds.

Welfare and our hospital system now is a joke but for a completely opposite reason. Hell the New Mexico, Arizona, and California (if not being bailed out in the budget) hospital systems are going bankrupt due to all the uninsured, most who are illegal aliens. Spend that attention and money on American citizens and "legal" immigrants and many problems will be fixed.

Link it. Most hospitals require prepayment (multiple times as expensive for the uninsured) or proof of insurance before treating anyone.

Basically get rid of every opportunity for illegals to stay here. Their are plenty of legal immigrants and high school kids, and even those struck in that welfare rut, that can take those jobs. I'll pay an extra 10 cents an orange... They are a much larger drain on our economy than are stated. Especially when it comes to healthcare and education.

The impact of illegal immigrants is greatly exaggerated and the problem isn't them, the problem is those hiring them. If you put massive monetary penalties along with years of prison time for anyone hiring illegal immigrants and you'll start reducing the problem (it'll never completely go away).

 

[Ghoullove]

As for Canadians getting assistance from our provincial health care abroad this only happens in life threatening circumstances where the service cannot be provided in your home province or elsewhere in Canada in a timely manner.

Many Canadians go to America to get health care and pay out of pocket because the waiting list is to long such as for diagnostic machines like MRI or CAT scanning devices.

I personally skip across the border for some electrolysis for my groin as I enjoy hairless love with my chicks. Only two more treatments to go to hair begone.

 

[Sicblades]

No one ever said our system in Canada is perfect either. I think the French have the best health care in the world but I'm not completely sure how it works over there.

I used to live beside a low-income housing complex about 8 years ago, and saw kids with their designer shoes and jeans and purses and sunglasses. I couldn't afford that shit, but that hardly justifies them having to pay obscene amounts of money to see a doctor.(Something they couldn't afford even if didn't buy their designer shit)

Isn't it also ironic that you(not you specifically, just in general) are striving to cop out of those taxes so you can afford the same things that they have? Personally, I'd rather live in a comfortable house where I know I can walk at night and not get stabbed/robbed, where my streets are clean, and just have a car that gets me from A to B, shoes that keep me warm, and in general just 'average' things, instead of having the 'latest and best' of everything.

Obviously it's not for me to dictate how people live their life, but happiness doesn't come from what you own.

 

[Ghoullove]

Canadian health care is not perfect. Far from that. I believe in having fast medical care no matter what the system. Most Canadians are middle class and pay an arm and a leg in taxes towards health care and have to wait in some cases 6 months to a year for cancer treatment. Sure you don't go bankrupt but it won't matter much if your dead.

On a lighter note, I have one of my freshly shaven chicks coming over for some ghoullovin tonight. Its my friends ex from a while back and she is quite the perv. She said she was going to pretend I was Barack.

 

[TheGM]

Obamas protectionistic stance on world trade will cripple USA, especially big companies like GM, Ford and so on.

Can't cripple something that killed itself long ago.

 

[Dragula]

Obamas protectionistic stance on world trade will cripple USA, especially big companies like GM, Ford and so on.

Can't cripple something that killed itself long ago.

True, however, the situation will most likely not improve.

 

[B5C]

. Most hospitals require prepayment (multiple times as expensive for the uninsured) or proof of insurance before treating anyone.

That is quite wrong. If it's an emergency a hospital MUST treat a patient with insurance or not. That is why illegal aliens go to ERs with colds and such.

 

[Maphusio]

I have to agree with the notion I do not owe anyone else a dime. If I make my own bread I should not have to help support people who are not as ambitious as me.

If you earn something with sweat and labor you should not be forced to give part of it away due to someones socialist ideas for society.

Fuck that "I'm my brothers keeper." bullshit, this is America and I am my own keeper.

/endrant

That being said I am keeping an open mind still that this "redistribution" will not get to out of hand.

This is why I'm glad I live in Canada, where "we" is more important than "me" and I get stuff like free health care.

We're all in this together. The sooner that more people realize this, the sooner things will improve for everybody.

The hammer and sickle and Trotsky quotes send off red flags (no pun intended) that I should probably not even touch this one as no good will come of it and I do not want to make enemies with people on this forum.

That being said if your socialistic paradise is working for you up in the great white north all the power to you comrade.

I personally do not want to have to worry about the threat of others taking what I rightfully earned.

Anyways no use getting real worked up over it, I do not think Obama's policies will get abused to the extent of actually pushing the States to a true "socialistic" system.

I think you are a bit confused pally. Socialism is not defined by free health care or free higher education... You should study up on it a bit. Case and point, being taxed for government run programs is also not socialism for if it were, we in America have been living a lie.

46 million uninsured, yet they have HD TVs, drive SUVs, and eat at Applebee's every weekend. Rough. Charging shit they don't need at 18% on a credit card.
If people learned to live within their means, they could afford health insurance in the US. Better yet, take the money you'd save on premiums and put it in a flexible CD, you'd probably make more money and still have funds to cover any medical expenses.
At least until Barry imposes his capital gains tax hike.

Anyway, my state provides health insurance for all kids and most lower-middle income families FREE. What backassed states do you all live in?

Killer, what sources do you have for this statement of yours? Or is this from your own minuscule experience in life? I don't mean to be offensive but when folk use their life experience in something like this, they should know just how small and insignificant their observations are.

 

[Per]

On the topic of elections, there's one thing I've been wondering: do people in states like Idaho or Alaska ever feel like they effectively don't have a vote? The probability that an election turns on the outcome of any western state other than California must be extremely small, and thus in most every (or perhaps every?) election concession speeches and acceptance speeches are held before their votes are even counted.

 

[Leon]

I think you are a bit confused pally. Socialism is not defined by free health care or free higher education... You should study up on it a bit. Case and point, being taxed for government run programs is also not socialism for if it were, we in America have been living a lie.

Indeed. Our fire fighters, police force, and library system are all socialized.

@Per:
I'm not sure about how people in those states feel, but the electoral college is an unfortunate holdover from a time without computers and instantaneous communications, and to be honest it makes everyone I know that understands it feel a little odd about what their vote is worth. It's a pretty sad thing that a presidential nominee could win the popular vote and still lose the election.

 

[Starseeker]

Whoever complains about Canadian health care is more than welcome to move to China.

 

[TheWesDude]

I'm not sure about how people in those states feel, but the electoral college is an unfortunate holdover from a time without computers and instantaneous communications, and to be honest it makes everyone I know that understands it feel a little odd about what their vote is worth. It's a pretty sad thing that a presidential nominee could win the popular vote and still lose the election.

uhhh.... wrong in every way.

the consitution is full of checks and balances.

the electoral college is there to over-turn the popular vote if needed to allow more "educated" people vote if needed. they believed the common man to be stupid and uninformed. they were right. the common man is stupid and uninformed. how can the average person have a job, spouse, children, house, car, etc, etc and keep informed and abreast of not only all the laws/bills going to congress not only to READ but also UNDERSTAND in a worldwide setup? he cannot. thats why we have the electoral college.

but where is the balance? whats to stop the overriding corruption that this allows? after all, i did say the constitution was full of checks and balances.

its simple. the balance to the electoral college is the right to bear arms. in a system that would purposefully allow corruption in the highest offices, the balance is the right for the common man to possess guns to forcibly remove those in power if needed.


now i do not at this time advocate the forcible revolution of the US, but the framers put it there because they understood there may be a time in the future when it is needed. after all, they had just done it.

 

[Sander]

On the topic of elections, there's one thing I've been wondering: do people in states like Idaho or Alaska ever feel like they effectively don't have a vote? The probability that an election turns on the outcome of any western state other than California must be extremely small, and thus in most every (or perhaps every?) election concession speeches and acceptance speeches are held before their votes are even counted.

Actually, this is just an illusion. If these western states weren't there, then the majority needed would be smaller and there'd be a result much sooner.

That probably doesn't help the feeling people have, though.

I'm not sure about how people in those states feel, but the electoral college is an unfortunate holdover from a time without computers and instantaneous communications, and to be honest it makes everyone I know that understands it feel a little odd about what their vote is worth. It's a pretty sad thing that a presidential nominee could win the popular vote and still lose the election.

The USA doesn't pretend to be one big monolithic nation, it's actually supposed to be a conglomeration of 50 smaller nations that each should have a rather large degree of independence.
Which is exactly why the electoral college exists. It has to exist because of the nature of the USA. Only when the USA changes more to a full nation instead of a conglomeration of states should the electoral college be abandoned in favour of a popular vote.

 

[Pope Viper]

Eff it, Texas should just secede and be it's own country.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Eff it, Texas should just secede and be it's own country.

yeah. good effing riddance. sorry, austin. location ruined ya. sink the damn state under the ocean i say.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

I think you are a bit confused pally. Socialism is not defined by free health care or free higher education... You should study up on it a bit. Case and point, being taxed for government run programs is also not socialism for if it were, we in America have been living a lie.

It can be defined (or at least the beginning of it) in many ways and in different forms.

My issue is not supporting certain government run programs but it is using my money I am forced to give on people who did not even work for it.

I think Obama said it best himself:

"It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you — that they've got a chance at success too."

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=308790933239252


Spreading the wealth around eh? Yes that totally does not sound like a socialist mind set.

Either way I am not worried about what he does at the moment, more so I am worried about what the future could bring with the ground work he lays.

 

[Leon]

@TheWesDude
That's even worse, and affirms concerns that one person's vote is worth more than another.

It has to exist because of the nature of the USA.

And why? I understand the nature of the United States being a conglomeration of separate entities, but why does that mean that the EC should be used rather than the popular vote?

 

[Pope Viper]

Eff it, Texas should just secede and be it's own country.

yeah. good effing riddance. sorry, austin. location ruined ya. sink the damn state under the ocean i say.

I'm Dallas, damn your monkey hide!

 

[Sander]

And why? I understand the nature of the United States being a conglomeration of separate entities, but why does that mean that the EC should be used rather than the popular vote?

Because it's the States that elect a president, not the people. Hence the States need to decide who they vote for.

Also, calling Obama a socialist is absolutely hilarious. The dude's about as right-wing as the most right-wing party we have here, and they're not even close to being socialists.
At most, Obama is a social-democrat, which usually means that there is a certain minimum lifestyle which should be supported by the government.

Also also, the idea that socialism is the equivalent of just giving money to people shows a fundamental lack of understanding that notion.

 

[Leon]

Because it's the States that elect a president, not the people. Hence the States need to decide who they vote for.

Alright, though I still disagree with the system for the way it discourages voter turnout and makes campaigns focus on swing states.

Also, calling Obama a socialist is absolutely hilarious.

Very much so. The USA is a conservative country by most of the worlds standards.

Also also, the idea that socialism is the equivalent of just giving money to people shows a fundamental lack of understanding that notion.

Unfortunately, that's to be expected here in the US. Most United States citizens believe things like "communism" and "socialism" to be synonyms, so don't expect most of them to have an understanding of what either (or most political ideologies for that matter) is or isn't.