going to buy a rifle---advice?

[Riko]

Originally Posted by lincpimp

Keep in mind that the socialist views of the rest of the world is generally being paid for by America, as we have the largest amount of disposable income (maybe cause all of us selfish people are paying for our own health care) we have. We are the biggest "buyer" in the world... Just ask China (see how they are getting more capitalist), they know how to sell us stuff. Also take a look at how the UK was affected by the economic meltdown in the US... When we stop buying everyone else has to cough...

Nothing against socialism (well I do but that is just me) but when I go to a socialist country like the UK (where I am from) I can see the weight of the gov't pressing on the people and the general lack of money. Just my observation.

I am personally also somebody that is not in favour for the one or the other.
My ideological preference is social oriented yess, but a general socialist run country is not ideal imo, for reasons you hint at.

A bit of socialism mixed with some libiral views, combining the best of 2 ideoligies is the best thing, I think. However that can sound a bit contradictory :)
(In belgium we had for about 10 years such a government: libirals + lefties (+ green) )

Originally Posted by lincpimp

Keep in mind that the socialist views of the rest of the world is generally being paid for by America, as we have the largest amount of disposable income (maybe cause all of us selfish people are paying for our own health care) we have. We are the biggest "buyer" in the world... Just ask China (see how they are getting more capitalist), they know how to sell us stuff. Also take a look at how the UK was affected by the economic meltdown in the US... When we stop buying everyone else has to cough...

okay, simply said the biggest economic power and (so far) no social welfare to match all that power..that is disturbing.
So, if I were an American with "european" vision, I would be thrilled by Obama's plans...:)

Ow and the main problem is the lack of government controll in the banking system in the US that caused the economic crisis with worldwide consequences.
US banks gave to much and to high credits to too many people who couldn't pay back their credits, that was the cause that started the whole thing.

All banks had assets and loans in other banks: US - European - Asian banks all connected to one another in some way.
It got bad in the US and the rest of the world had to pay the consequenses.

It was Reagan who had deregulated the control over the banks, and it is Obama again who is planning to put the banking world bank under strict controll.
Even in Europe, wich is already strictly controlled by the govermententities, they are going towards stricter regulations.

Originally Posted by lincpimp

Nothing against socialism (well I do but that is just me) but when I go to a socialist country like the UK (where I am from) I can see the weight of the gov't pressing on the people and the general lack of money. Just my observation.

hmm, isn't that almost a stereotipical narrowminded vision of the American tourist going outside his borders and making a arrogant remark?
That sounds like you actual believe that the UK has only poor people DUE to the social system that sucks out all the money and that the US is a country from wich the citizens only have benefits DUE to the lack of a system like in the UK?

please, how many people are in deep shit because of lack of a descent wellfare system?...
it doesn't take a degree in politics to see that the system in america causes a lot of dramatic situations. How many Americans don't have a healt care insurance? 30 million, or more?
And of the ones that do have one, wich of those insurance companies does actually help you out the way it should be I wonder :)


Like I already said, you guys have a history of "absolute freedom in every level" and introducing a system wich is based on solidarity and basically means 'to give money for the greater cause' is not something that will be accepted overnight.

PS: comparing the economic might of the UK with that of the US is not very wise since the UK is many times smaller and has 5 times less inhabitants...
If you would compare the US with the European Union, wich is a Economical Union (a collection of well organized social wellfare states vs the US) that is more like it.

edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_GDP_(nominal)
So, is our system that bad? or are some of you really that arrogant to deny the facts?

[lincpimp]

Originally Posted by Riko

I am personally also somebody that is not in favour for the one or the other.
My ideological preference is social oriented yess, but a general socialist run country is not ideal imo, for reasons you hint at.

A bit of socialism mixed with some libiral views, combining the best of 2 ideoligies is the best thing, I think. However that can sound a bit contradictory :)
(In belgium we had for about 10 years such a government: libirals + lefties (+ green) )




okay, simply said the biggest economic power and (so far) no social welfare to match all that power..that is disturbing.

So, if I were an American with "european" vision, I would be thrilled by Obama's plans...:)




hmm, isn't that almost a stereotipical narrowminded vision of the American tourist going outside his borders and making a arrogant remark?
That sounds like you actual believe that the UK has only poor people DUE to the social system that sucks out all the money and that the US is a country from wich the citizens only have benefits DUE to the lack of a system like in the UK?

please, how many people are in deep shit because of lack of a descent wellfare system?...
it doesn't take a degree in politics to see that the system in america causes a lot of dramatic situations. How many Americans don't have a healt care insurance? 30 million, or more?
And of the ones that do have one, wich of those insurance companies does actually help you out the way it should be I wonder :)


Like I already said, you guys have a history of "absolute freedom in every level" and introducing a system wich is based on solidarity and basically means 'to give money for the greater cause' is not something that will be accepted overnight.

PS: comparing the economic might of the UK with that of the US is not very wise since the UK is many times smaller and has 5 times less inhabitants...
If you would compare the US with the European Union, wich is a Economical Union (a collection of well organized social wellfare states vs the US) that is more like it.

edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_GDP_(nominal)
So, is our system that bad? or are some of you really that arrogant to deny the facts?

Being British it would be hard to stereotype me as a narrow minded American.

Also, people move to the US for a reason. I cannot imagine it is because they are 100% happy with their socialistic home country...

My father moved from the UK to the US in the 80s, and he will tell you that it is better here. More opportunity to succeed, grow, and prosper.

You may also want to keep in mind that in the UK more than half of the population is employed by the gov't in some way. So the other half get to pay for it (17% VAT is a good start). Big gov't does not do anyone any good, save for the people in power, and who ever they favor.

Also you mention that the UK has 5 times less people, but it is also the size of florida. So there is alot more people per land unit than the US. Not sure what you are getting at with this...

Also, what is the problem with people just paying for what they want? Maybe 30million americans do not have health insurance, but how many of those want to pay for it? Maybe they chose not to pay for ins and just pay when they needed it? Should we nationalize whores too? That way I can go and wait in line for that all day? Pay as you go is a good idea for alot of things, and for people who go to the doctor every 5 years it is way cheaper to pay when you need it.

Base point is that i do not want to pay for other people. Period. People on welfare are not doing anything positive, and if they ceased to exist tomorrow all we would have would be more space and money. Same thing with everything the gov't gets their greedy mitts into. Nothing is done correctly by the gov't (which seems to have an average IQ of 75) and that is why the bulk of us narrow minded republicans do not want the gov't in health care. They will just f it up like everything else they do. And big gov't equals big taxes. Pretty simple to understand that, the more people that are working for the gov't, the more you have to pay, thus the taxes have to go up. Hard to refute that.

Here in the US, mainly thanks to a bunch of pussies, we are catering to the least common denominator. Schools pander to dumb kids, the dumbest people get the most help, and the intelligent people are crucified whenever we point this out. But we are still expected to pay for a bunch of people who do not deserve to be here. We are focused on minorities of all types, instead of doing things that will most benefit the majority of us. Everyone wants something free, and that is all this democratic health care is, another handout to people who refuse to get a real job and step in line with the rest of us.

I will say that it seems a bit arrogant of you to somehow understand how the american society needs this health care without having any experience about how american society works... I am glad socialism is working for your country, and hope that it continues to do that. I can say that it will not work here, for many reasons.