You really haven't told us anything. Guess what, we have to work with the insurance companies in order to bring down costs. Really you want a public option? Social security, welfare, medicare. How have those programs panned out?
So I'm confused. If this bill is so horrible because it helps the insurance industry so much, why are liberals so proud of themselves for passing it? Is this why the Dems aren't mentioning the bill now that it's election time?
here's a statistic...100% of people with any kind of brain want nothing to do with ANY PART of the TAX & JAIL TROJAN HORSE MANDATE for HC that includes no health care in it...100% of the time....... chumps.....
All of this CBO stuff came from one little point that was made:
You brought up the marginal tax rate of 90% and my whole (and ONLY) point was that if you're going to say that-- you have to look at the WHOLE STORY. We were talking about the top % of earners, which tells a different story than an average.
Yes, the marginal tax rate was 90% but there were MORE loopholes to get through -- so that 90% is misleading.
Lets keep the fights clean & not change the topic from "Whats wrong with our system/healthcare" to "what's wrong with you."
In other words, there is no place in the debate for accusations such as:
"leave the "no nobody does it better than us, if they do they're on their way to Communism, Nazism ... " to the likes of Glenn Beck" It's un-productive.
Reference your sources, and argue your opinion. There are good points on both sides -- no reason to call ppl liar or other names.
Not to mention, our debt is almost 10% of our GDP. This is unprecedented debt.
Also, we're fighting a 2 front war, in the worse recession since the G. Depression, etc and everything else we're currently having to deal with.
NOW of all times, you want to upend the system and give the govt control of an ADDTL 16-18% of our GPD and pay for it with cuts to MEDICARE and higher taxes?
Higher taxes slow job creation. Govt option would slow job creation. Is it REALLY a good idea right now?
I realize that a "Govt option" and a "govt takeover" are different, but several independent studies have showed that the one PROBABLY leads to the other over a matter of a few years with the language written in the most championed HR-3200 bill.
If it's more COMPETITION you want -- govt competiting with private sector - that's GREAT with me. But make it a fair fight -- don't stack it all in the govt's favor with my tax dollars, and then say, "see? private sector sucks!"
You want to take it back to healthcare? Fine - I agree, but lets not accuse each other of lying when giving cited statistics. Lets keep it above the belt.
Here is my problem - the current
admin wants to take "something that is imperfect, and replace it with something worse."
THAT is what so many ppl (such as myself) have a problem with. The reason Canada/G.B/others spend such a small amount of their GDP on healthcare is they don't need to come up with anything new - the US handles that.
Back to the topic of this youtube clip, there's something terribly wrong with our healthcare that leaves so many uninsured or suffering & makes a few blood sucking scumbags rich out of their misery.
Instead of religiously holding our sinking ground, let's see what others have done right or wrong and steal the best ideas, like America has always done and leave the "no nobody does it better than us, if they do they're on their way to Communism, Nazism ... " to the likes of Glenn Beck
I am giving you VALID statistics I am pulling off GOVT websites, which I have cited. If you want to dispute them, fine, but give me referrences instead of saying I am just misinforming.
Yes, big evil goldman sachs found loopholes in the system -- on paper they LOST money. Our system is designed so that you get tax benefits for that and thus pay less.
You want to challence the status quo in healthcare - challence the status quo in your LOGIC first.
As for whether the poor or middle-class have it easier in Europe & Canada, yes, yes they do b/c their social safety is more generous, their healthcare is cheaper & more accessible & their min wages are higher. Again you can correctly argue, as the right does in Europe, their unemp rate is higher as a result & they have fewer billionaires. Valid counter punches, but again let's not dispute the obvious
Or can we stop talking about tax loopholes being plugged compared to 50's? Do you know how much Goldman Sachs paid in taxes last year? You wanna guess my friend? .... 1% ... ONE FRIGGIN PERCENT!!! (google " bloomberg goldman sachs 2008 tax"). So my friend please don't give me this stuff, again you have enough ammunition in your arsenal not to resort to this
dsteve my friend, can we stick with real statistics and the obvious? Otherwise we would be chasing our tail & not worth having a discussion. You can still make valid arguments for merits of free market. But let's accept the obvious truth that the rich is getting richer, their income & dividend taxes got cut & cut & cut again especially during W era, to the degree that even billionaire Warren Buffet blasted the system that lets him pay a tax rate almost 1/2 of what his secretary pays
Dsteve my friend, all references that I looked up show the effective tax rates actually coming DOWN from 1979 (couldn't find effective rates going back later than that), and the top marginal tax rates have come down HUGELY since 50's-60's. Where did you see effective taxes go UP? Not only that, I found the change in Average AFTER TAX Income from 79-05. The top 1% saw it grow by 200%, the bottom 5% by less than 10%. See it in epi org, google "CBO data reveal unprecedented inequality"
As far as the statistic the disinformation artist does quote--that too is pure bullshit and doctored, but that is too complex a matter to go into here.
These are Trotksyite-Goebbelsians propagandists pure and simple.
You are correct -- I went back and reviewed your post -- you said 11% of workers - and I read 11% of GDP.
I owe you an apology for misreading your post -- Im sorry.
That doesn't make me a "misinformation artist" or a "hired hand" for the insurance companies or Repubs or whoever, whose job is to keep an eye on you and Cenk, but that's another issue.
However, my stat is still valid -- we're exporting more than in previous years -- that's moving in the right direction. Disagree?
The really hilarious aspect of the Bush and Chgney coalition of Zionist Born Agains, Neo-Cons, and Corporate Fascists is this--anyone of them will sell out the other two at the drop of a hockey puck.
Ah, Ivy League Football in the 60's--the first blush of weight training, steroids, and the newly legalized defensive forearm.
They all contributed to the demise of American colelge football as a gentleman's pastime, but that last almost destroyed even the concept of the sport.
Meanwhile Goldman Sachs, one of Paulson's fomer employers, and beneficiary of a taxpayer bailout, directlya nd indirectly, makes money hand over fist in currency arbitrage, hahahahaha.
US bankruptcy and economic collapse is irrelevant to their purposes--and they move mountains to tell you dumbasses that everything is hunky dory, and that Bush and Cheney did not destroy the economy and get the US bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively a quagmire and a debacle.
Perhaps he is assigned to Cenk not only because of the for profit insurance angle but because Cenk is a Muslim?
Do you not, btw find irony that you refer to me as a "virtual neo-Naz" and in the same breath call me a "hyper-Zionist Neo-Con" who "want the US to attack Iran for Israel"
If i'm Nazi, would I really want to help Israel?
Logic, buddy. You gotta focus on logic.
Go ahead and post 18 comments so that my posts get drowned out.
Rant and rave you fanatic. Rant and rave.
It's like talking to a 5 year old. Logic is irrelevant and the loudest voice wins (you're winning, huh?)
dsteve040 is a flack hired fraudulenttly to discredit even the idea of a sane and rational public health insurance as other industrialized countries have had for some long time.
Classic Social Darwinist--of exactly the type that produced Marx and Enegles and both Socialism and Communism as the only remedy.
And where does all the new debt monies that we printed end up? In boardrooms of Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, United Health... Yeah, and we're supposed to jump up & down chanting "hurray hurray Reaganesque freemarketers"
So I am with you mopsius about our dire state of affairs. Call me a dreamer, but I believe we'll come out of this b/c of our iPod and Tweeter generation, b/c of that persistent drive for excellence, innovation and hope which is in our collective DNA
We then resort to more debt (printing money), personally nationally, to buy yet more stuff from them & again we dont produce enough to sell them. Even a larger account deficit. And what do they do with all that extra money?
They buy oil (higher oil prices). They invest in countries that scratch to harm us somehow. They come here and buy land and American companies. And then with their leftover $ they buy treasury bonds, a promise by our government to give them even more money in future
But my friend I don't deny that we're losing the lead, if not already. For the past few decades, we've let the captains of profit see to the demise of our industrial infrastructure, we now import everything from computers to our underwear, and in exchange what do we export? Wood pulp and grains, just like a third world country in the 70's. We buy all those things from China & Japan and in exchange we don't have enough for them to buy, so they end up with more of our money (trade account deficit)
Exactly --only eleven percent of the US work force even works in areas where exportable goods are produced, and not everything they make is actually exported.
The illusion of US economic "prosperity" hinges on USD being the world reserve currency.
But that is over, and the house of cards is crashing.
According to the US Dept of Commerce website (latest data):
Exports comprised 11.5% of U.S. GDP in the second quarter of 2007. To put in historical terms, exports were 9.4% of U.S.
GDP five years earlier (Q2 2002), and 5.0% 40 years ago (Q2 1967)
So if you're going to use stats, make sure they are correct, or at least heading in the right direction. Otherwise it really ruins your credibility on a point.
That's where our positive & risk taking attitude comes from. That's why from automobile to airplane to iPod, most innovations have come from America.
Japan, Taiwan or more recently China, have excelled us big time in manufacturing and incremental tech advances. And they have made a loooot of profit in the process, but they don't have much to show in the way of innovation.
Drive for innovation more than anything is a function of culture and attitude, and that's what we have aplenty
Well first of all, I asked nicely that you not rant.
Jeez, Are there no manners in crazy land?
Again, using oil as an example is a really bad example -- the mrkt is not limited to the U.S. buying oil. With India and China's economies growing at 12% per annum, there are suddenly a lot more buyers and OPEC controls most supply (thus not free mrkt). 70/barrel is current mrkt equilibrium.
You make an inductive fallacy that free mrkt = oil mrkt and call it logic. When in fact its... FANATICAL.
mopsius, you've some points my friend but you know why I haven't given up on America? B/c of that unique American risk taking attitude & drive for excellence. My friend dsteve attributes that to quest for profit.I have a different view,I think this drive is part of our social DNA which we inherited from those rugged yet hopeful fellows who left Europe for the prospect of a new life halfway across the world.The well to do who were after easy profit stayed behind,the risk takers were who set sail
In September 2008, with the collapse of the whole world economy, oil returned to a supply and demand price in USD and other currencies--roughly three times the price in January 2002 though varying.
There is no US "export economy" to speak of anymore, as Roberts also realizes.
Reality called and was upset it missed you. I took a message.
Again, for the 19th time (and please don't start another ranting craze -- it's not very constructive)...
What happens when the US Economy doesn't implode? WHat happens to your theories when you're wrong about, "Either way it does not matter--the US is over."??
Similar to Marx, any nugget of truth will be dismissed as the ravings of a loon when you're proven to be wrong.
The world knows. US private big oil knows. The for profit health insurers know. Goldman Sachs and the others who got bailouts know. Mexicans and Canadians know. The only people being kept in the dark are most of the American people, who are going top be asked to pay for the incompetent fuck ups at the top for the next thirty years, and after that their children and grandchildren.
we get it with the oil references. It's a poor example of free mrkt, as outlined in previous posts -- move on.
For better or worse, about 1/3 of all products made in the world are purchased and consumed in the US, though we constitute 5% of the world population (World Research Inst.). That makes us the largest economy on any standard - whether you use the USD, the pound, or the Yen.
Yes, yes, evil hateful capitalism. We understand your theme. Thanks for the recap.
I get it -- you don't like the "big evil corporations" and that's fine. However, these are (AGAIN) the exception, not the rule. 99.7% of employer businesses in the US are SMALL business (SBA Office of Advocacy 2009)
That there is corruption, and problems, does not mean the system is bad. Every system as large as ours will have waste.
THese big corps however do fund our 401Ks so that our incomes can be supplemented where SOCIAL SECURITY fails us.
The CBO stats can be found at CBO wbsite. Google "Historical Effective Tax Rates".
The rift btwn the richest and poorest is huge, yes, and the system isn't perfect. However, most ppl have more financially than their grandparents. Does that mean the system is failing us? We're wealthier individually AND as a nation.
Poor us that our poorest of poor can't afford to buy TVs and homes. What's your point? Is it better in Canada? EU?
Everywhere has poverty, and US has less than most countries.
If Goldman Sachs execs get billions of bonus,that's good.Perhaps one day your kid can work there.If to boost profit Cigna denies care to your dying mom,it's good.Perhaps you can buy their stock in your 401k.If we've lost our industrial base for a massive debt to China,it's good,you can now afford a big LCD TV
Is this the promise of pursuit of happiness this nation was founded on? Is all that's left of our patriotism empty chants of USA,USA shaking the #1 foam finger...that's made in China?
And the way the Democrats and Republicans and financial and military and industrial and US other elites are going full speed ahead with blinders on there is no possibility of reform or restructuring.
You said it perfectly, we've become a society where "everybody has a shot". We've become a bunch of greedy pricks in front of Vegas slot machines
Those on the top,execs of Goldman Sachs,Exxon,United Health ... are doing everything in their power to turn their $100 million take homes to $1, $10, $100 billions no matter how many pensions or homes they destroy, how many rivers they pollute or how many sick they kill. And the rest of us are just happy to have a shot at one day becoming like them
Not able to keep up with inflation, this segment of pop resorted to more & more debt to buy everything from TVs to homes, that their stagnant wages couldn't provide. While our politicians boasted about the GDP growth that all that new wealth(=new debt) created.
Eventually what price did they pay for the error of not reading the fine print on page 27 of their loan contract? THEY LOST THEIR HOMES. What did the bank execs get for their errors? $100 million severance packages. How American.
As an aside, if you buy a home you cant afford and lose it -- that's NOT your mortgage companies fault.
Look at the banks now - do you think they WANT all these houses back? Of course not -- they're going under because of all of this & would prefer you pay back the money you borrowed to buy your stuff. After all, you did say you would pay it back when you borrowed it.
This attitude that we should protect ppl from themselves is absurd. You make a promise and break it -- now your a victim??
My friend, you also cited CBO stats (where do you get them BTW?) to claim disparity b/w poor & rich has shrunk compared to 60's and I cite the highest concentration of wealth in the top 1%, now owning about 40% of the pie, as the proof of the opposite. But just ask your grandparents if it was easier to provide for a family, food, shelter,college, with a single income in the 50's or today
And you know what gets the bottom 50% going? The greatest innovation of Capitalism: CREDIT CARD
This one is really important: One of the premises of your argument is flawed:
"the smaller poverty gap back then". According to the US Census wbsite, In 1960 the poverty level was 20.7%, and in 2006 was only 10.6 (last posted year).
Is that not progress in the right direction? Is our country, as a whole, so much worse? With 50% less ppl in poverty?
You hold this point up as your shining light of the perils of capitalism, but the stats dont support it.
Hey dsteve, sorry for delay. Quickly, You say there are no longer scientists like Einstein who innovate for love of science & not money? Google "Americans Nobel medicine 2009" to see the 3 American Univ Profs who just won Nobel for Medicine. Also search "Greatest Canadian" in Wiki to see that the father of universal healthcare in Canada got the title in TVed national survey. Why would Canadians hold him is such high esteem if their system is so miserable? BTW Gretzky ended up 10th :)
I'm not saying curiosity doesn't ever lead to knowledge, or that no one would learn anything new without corporate backing, but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.
OK, 3 profs got the nobel prize -- but what about the teams of scientists Pfizer employs to come up with better heart medicines, or the scientists and engineers Siemens employee that come up with the new/better machine that detects heart defects in infants.
These corps want profit, but is it less productive or noble?
Yes there are a lot of loopholes in our current tax system, but not NEARLY as much. The restucturing of how you can take capital gains ALONE changed the "effective tax rate" significantly.
This is significant I'm talking comparison here between 70s and today. The CBO keeps records of this, and the effective rate for the upper brackets has dropped 8-10%.
Don't skew what I post -- I didn't say its an airtight system now, but that touted "90% marginal tax rate" is misleading.
Canadas lack of doctors or "shortcomings" in medicine are not a function ofthe "underinvestment in training health specialists", it's a function of controling compensation. Canada loses a lot of doctors to the U.S. who move here to make more money.
And this one is the best yet: you argue that the fate of poor & sick in Europe & US is...eh,the same. This is,my friend, your attempt to convince yourself, thru tortured logic and imagination, that our super-Capitalist society is no more brutal, selfish & inhumane than other western democracies. The all holy Capitalism has brought us all the progress and happiness in the world and not any noticeable misery, at least as compared to Europeans.This is the mother of all religious Kool-Aids my friend
To your last rant, "you argue that the fate of poor & sick in Europe & US is...eh,the same... The all holy Capitalism has... religious Kool-Aids my friend"
No, I don't argue that EU or US are the same. As from previous posts, I'm proud of our differences. Not that poor suffer, but that we are diff.
Again, I go back to my argument from before -- if we are so brutal, why do so many ppl come here?
This is the "land of opportunity" where everyone gets a shot at the big time.
My friend I'm sorry but I call you religiously Capitalist b/c of comments like "actual taxes in 60's & 70's were lower b/c of loopholes", as if there are no loopholes right now or the 90% tax rate had no impact on the smaller poverty gap back then. Or that I have to ask you to google "forbes happiest places 2009" to see the top 10 happiest nations,with the exception of Canada and NZ, are all European
As if this was not self evident from their long vacations,social system and less stressful life
As for Canadian health care, just ask your friend who Canadians view as the greatest Canadian. It's Tommy Douglas, who introduced the universal health care. As for shortcomings of their system in the last decade, you can verify with him agaion, it was not because of the public insurance declined coverage as is the case with the blood sucking private ins in this country, it was rather because of underinvestment in training health specialists in the 90's
dsteve, I dont want to dwell on this any longer, but it all started when you equated "profit=innovation". I don't deny scientists & innovators would like handsome compensation but their main driver,from Newton to Einstein, has been curiosity not MONEY. The correlation b/w profit and innovation is very loose at best. Execs at AIG, Goldman Sachs, Bernie Madoff and dozen or so traders on Wall Street each made billions last year. That's a lot of profit, show me the innovation
Hey mopsius, I don't dispute that many hi-tech or pharma companies spend about 25% of their revenue on R&D. That would result in innovations in some cases. But even in the industry this is a known fact. People who start a hitech company JUST FOR THE MONEY will fail. The common wisdom is that you must LOVE and scratch for the technology you work on, curosity instinct as I call it, to be successful. Money will then follow. So again, all I'm disputing is the blanket statement profit=innovation.
RD is absolutely important, however--you are right.
But even there private, for profit R&D is much more limited than R&D in other contexts, in universities or government or private and non-profit, where the goal is discovery, not a discovery that is immediately significant for the bottom line.
Here the Japanese are way ahead of the US, as Germany has traditionally been (excepting the NAZI's, whose bottomline was secret weapons).
Ok, here goes: Who are the new "Netwons and Einsteins"? Are there any? No - now they are funded by private companies and the rate of technological growth is MUCH higher.
As to who is the greatest Canadian, I'm pretty sure my friend would say Wayne Gretzky.
I told you that my friend is Canadian, and obviously I asked his opinion on all of this.
He is for private insurance (vs. single payer) because of rationed care. His comment was that the Canadian system is great if you've got the flu, but if you need a CT, you might wait 6 days, 6 weeks, or 6 months -- you just don't know.
His comment was, "That really sucks if you need a CT, because you might not have 6 weeks, so you go to the U.S. and pay for it."
Why should we surrender happier, longer, healthier life to Europeans just as a means of distinction?... drive for excellence... instead of our screwing the poor & sick.
Who says Europeans are happier? The studies I have heard have shown the reverse and lifestyle has a lot to do with longevity.
As to screwing the sick - does Europe not do that through rationing care? Thats a problem with both systems in diff. ways.
I think what you say here sounds great but is impractical
How can you be proud of America DESPITE Joe the Plumber? That was VERY American of him.
I will agree the gap btwn rich and poor is an issue, but it is one that must be handled carefully so as not to stifle that which makes us great. And yes, it is the loss of uniqueness AND the loss of freedom I am worried about.
Lets be fair, when taking 60s and 70s, the marginal tax rate was higher, but there were also a TON of loopholes, and the effective tax rate was LOWER than today.
And I'm still waiting on your answer my friend. If health ins is a commodity like wheat or coffee then why haven't margins of 5% materialized yet in bigger states with lots of competition? And even at that not-yet-existent 5%, why give something away only to get a portion of it back through taxes or charity for NO BENEFIT? Also there's an inherent conflict of interest in private ins, their main goal is profit and not the welfare of society. The more they deny claims the higher their profit
You asked a valid question: if Gov is to enter the health ins arena what prevents it from getting into shelter building, manufacturing... Because Gov is not meant to do everything, especially when it comes to production. The inefficient industries must be allowed to die and Gov protection prevents that. Gov is, however, responsible to preserve rights and guarantee the welfare of the society. Access to basic health care falls under both categories just like public education or justice system
Do you think in the 60's & 70's,with 90% top marginal tax rate & much smaller gap b/w rich and poor,we looked less American? Weren't we still, and to a higher degree, land of opportunity? Didn't we have big corporations or wealthy individuals back then? Why should we surrender happier, longer, healthier life to Europeans just as a means of distinction?I'd rather stay distinct thru our tireless optimism, love of justice & freedom and drive for excellence... instead of our screwing the poor & sick
I am with you on the greatness of this country and I'm proud of it despite Glenn Beck or Joe the Plumber. But I don't understand why the price of freedom is to have such a huge gap between "haves and have-nots"? How are other western countries with a smaller poverty gap less free? Perhaps it's not the loss of freedom, rather losing the uniqueness of our character and Americanism that you're worried about?
And so to answer your actual question: What do PRIVATE insurance companies bring to the table:
The same as any other private company. What does a private homebuilder bring to the table? Couldn't a govt. org, who could get much better economies of scale, do a better job? Don't ppl NEED shelter?
dsteve, yes you're right you've said in the past that you're in favor of some form of reigning in free market through regulations. I think when you started talking about Communism, Russia, inferiority of Canada, scientists thru history have invented because they were after money... you sounded like Rudi Giuliani or Sarah Palin who advocate less regulation. And I apologize if I haven't hit all of your points, I have hogged this forum already as is. Let me know what I missed and I try
Couple of things here -- these are getting longer so we might have to switch to direct youtube emails soon.
To cut to the point, I think we fundamentally disagree on one point: You believe that scientists invent regardless of profits, and I disagree.
I don't 100% disagree -- obviously there are altruistic actions, but look at the speed of progress in the 20th/21st that occurs when the modern big evil capitalistic machine starts paying ppl for their innovation -- it's remarkable
happy, to my "lecture about the merits of health insurance", you asked what role the insurance companies play.
If I didnt interpret it correctly, maybe you misworded the question.
However, my scenarios of competition are not "imaginary". Look at other commodities, which you can make a GREAT argument that health insurance is nothing but a commodity. See what kind of margins appear in commonly traded commodities. NOT 20%, 30%, etc.
and the US is also wealthiest, most successful, most hated (but also emulated) country.
More ppl immigrate to the US than ANY other country because it's "the land of opportunity."
The price you pay for this freedom is that there are haves and have-nots. It's like show-biz, you can make it big or you can fall on your ass, but everyone gets a shot at the big time.
So my point is, I don't want the US to become like "everybody else" and lose what makes it great.
By the way about Canada, hear it from someone who's lived there for more than a decade. They, with 1/10 of our population, have created a wonderful country out of that otherwise frozen wasteland. And from basketball, to snowmobil & jetski, to Insulin to AM radio, pager, Blackberry and Java language their innovations are nothing to sneeze at
I ask about the value of PRIVATE health insurance and you lecture me about the merits of health insurance in general, as if I am against the concept. You resort to imaginary scenarios where competition would bring down corp profit to 5% ignoring the fact that CA & NY are a country in their own right with more than ample competition, how come margins are not at 5% there? And even at that imaginary 5% the question remains. WHY? What do ins co's give back in return?
If there are societies like Canada where people are happier, healthier, live longer, have longer paid vacations, lower incarceration and crime rates and yet have a lot of millionaires and billionaires, well there MUST be something wrong with them. Aha they are on their way to communism, and if it hasn't happened already it's because of proximity to US. So based on that logic Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany ... haven't turned communist because? ... Their proximity to Queen Elizabeth perhaps?
Look, don't get hung up on Canada with what I'm saying here.
WHat I said was an off-handed remark to something you said, and it is certainly not the meat of my argument. One of my best friends and his wife are Canadian. They still call it home, although they love the US.
Sure, there are plenty of spots on the spectrum btwn Capitalism and COmmunism, but here is my point:
For better or worse, the U.S. is the only place in the developed world where capitalism is SO widespread... (cont)
When this vulgar capitalism collapses spectacularly bringing down the entire global economy, wiping out retirement savings, throwing millions out of their homes, and then crawls on its knees to that big bad government begging to save it, you say it wasn't its fault. No, No, No, the reason must be somewhere else. Gov was the reason. Oh even better, it was lack of deregulation. Just like excuses a religious person would give when faced with evidence that earth is not flat
800B for banks, 11.2 TRILLION to kick start the economy, 17.5% real unemployment including those who gave up or part timers--our answer to this expenditure is, give insurance co's more money and screw the poor or those inbetween jobs, now, yes, 17.5%.
I have never been more ashamed of Congress or America for allowing this to be our priority. The friggin FRENCH do it better.
They limit your liability to risk in the case of a medical emergency. You pay a premium to limit what you would pay in an emergency. If it is mismanaged, thats a different problem.
In a truly competitive environment, a 20% profit wouldnt happen. MAYBE 5% -- similar to commodities.
Insurance is insurance, it's not intel vs. amd, it's an FL orange vs CA orange. It's a commodity so it would trade as such if mrkt was allowed to control.
dsteve, sorry for invoking religion again, but you know my friend a reasonable person starts with logic and his belief follows. A religious diehard starts with a belief and then struggles to drag logic along. Capitalism is like a religion to you conservatives. You view challenging it blasphemy and see dissidents as worshippers of communism. I ask if we have become a greedy savage society and you bring up Russia as alternative, a chewed-up Soviet leftover, as if our choices are just b/w these two
happy, I'm not offended you invoke religion (I think its a red herring, but not insulting), but I am insulted that the reason for the comparison is your claim, "A religious diehard starts with a belief and then struggles to drag logic along".
I don't know how more logical I can be. I'm giving you statistics to back up my claims; how is that not logical?
No offense meant, but it seems here that you have TOTALLY sidestepped my arguments and are now nipping at the fringes of the discussion.
"If animal instinct is our dominant driver, we'll be mostly thinking about ourselves and our own profit & not giving a rat's hoot about anything outside of our immediate circle..."
Even *if* this is true, thinking of yourself can help others.
The guy who came up with the compact fluorsescent lightbulb -- what if he ONLY cared about a proft? That still saves resources and helps our planet. Win-win.
Rush Limbaugh is a WINDBAG, but he gives a lot to charity. Food for thought.
Back to healthcare(sorry for my longwinded rant), I ask you my friend, other than taking a 30% profit (or let's say 20% in your super-competitive no-state-barrier environment), what benefit does a private health ins company have for the society?
FedEx ships packages. Intel makes computer chips. Pfizer makes pills. But what service does a private health ins company provide?
And a big picture question, which instinct do you think is the dominant driver in our current capitalist system?
As an example:Competition/Capitalism is shown to produce innovation and results. Lets examine socialist state Russia -- the only innovations they achevied were when competing with US. (arms/space/etc.)
They were GREATLY lagging in everyday commodities and luxuries (such as television, automobiles, etc.)
Ok, granted -- thats unfair, but lets look at other stats:
According to the US Census website:
The % of pop in poverty is SIGNIFICANTLY down in the last 50 years. Over 10% of families make 100K+ a year.
If the middle class is shrinking, it means that more ppl are joining the upper class.
You'd have to pay me a lot to sit in the hotseat of CEO - if you fail, you're screwed forever in getting a job. I would need compensation for that too.
Now I agree that corporations provide capital necessary to achieve goals that any one of our instincts might pursue
Fine by me as long as the corporations serve a purpose for the society other than lining the pockets of their owners. And I will become an avid proponent of capitalism if employees and workers have a broader ownership of corporations and share the profit
That way you can have your free market my friend while I won't fret over a gradual march towards capitalistic dictatorship
To your comment :" Fine by me as long as the corporations serve a purpose for the society ... And I will become an avid proponent of capitalism if employees ... share the profit" (shortened for space)
Corp serve many roles including jobs/income for society so that they can pay taxes to run our govt.
As to ownership, employees are often offered stock options, etc. and employees have the right to buy stocks -- should the employees also then be liable to pay out if a company LOSES money?
Mother Teresa or Jonas Salk, the inventor of Polio vaccine who forewent his patent and profit rights, are examples of those with dominant human instinct
And scientists & engineers who eat pizza for breakfast and spend 20hrs/day in front of a computer to solve a problem or make a new invention are mainly driven by their curiosity instinct
I would argue my friend, that most of inventions and innovations in the human history were driven by the human and curiosity instincts more than profit
I have to disagree with your post about Mother Teresa types being the driving force behind innovation.
I would say those are the exceptions, rather than the rule. Most new inventions are created by ppl or teams funded by private corporations who get well compensated for their work. Corps fund in hope of a new/better product to sell FOR PROFIT.
I doubt these individuals would go to all of the trouble for free. Although some would, again I think this is the exception, not the rule.
We all have different degrees of these necessary instincts that define our personality & sense of morality. If animal instinct is our dominant driver, we'll be mostly thinking about ourselves and our own profit & not giving a rat's hoot about anything outside of our immediate circle, whether it's people getting crushed in the society or the planet we trash for our own pleasure.You know people like Rush Limbaugh or Angelo Mozilo
Human instinct--selfishness, materialism, abstract prophetic religion and state, murder, war, genocide, the individual, greed, capitalism, nuclear world war, end of species.
Wow. I asked for comment, and you certainly delivered. If I don't hit all the points and answer you, I'm sorry. There is a lot here.
I don't have an answer formulated as to what insticts a human being has. I approach the problem from a different angle: what has history shown us that produced results.
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches"
Therefore, it must be false? That's a logic fallacy to assume that just because it occurs enough to warrant someone referring to it as law does not therefore make it false.
Besides, I already TOLD you, I work for the for-profit health industry. Jeez, I've said it like 50x -- the worst - most evil - most vile one you can think of, whichever one that is.
Because I disagree someone must be paying me, right? I couldnt POSSIBLY just disagree vehemently, right?. WHat a cop-out.
Thats great -- that was like a 4 hour rant. Are you practicing for the UN talks?
Look, just because you didn't get your dream job after you dropped out of college after 3 semesters because you were "just too smart" and so "couldn't focus" doesn't mean the system has failed.
That means *YOU* have failed. Quit blaming the US (where even poor ppl are FAT) for your problems.
YOu remind me of The Flaming Lips, "You think you're a radical, but you're not - you're fanatical... FANATICAL"
what's so funny aout all this is that you do EXACTLY what you have previously accused me of, which is posting so much that you're posts get hidden. Take a look -- you posted like 45 posts last night.
I'll say again, you could just ANSWER my questions instead of ranting and we might all get something out of this.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU'RE WRONG AND THE US DOESNT COLLAPSE?
I'll also say again that it's good you are the extreme minority, because you're loony... FANATICAL.
This has been flagged as spam show
check out my channel :)
happy holidays
MyrandaCrystal 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
TheNitricOxide 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
simplechocolatediet 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
pheromoneaction 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
truehealthyproducts 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
FatReleaseSystem 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Really enjoyed you video informative. When you have time come visit my channel!
TheHcgdietplan 11 months ago
You really haven't told us anything. Guess what, we have to work with the insurance companies in order to bring down costs. Really you want a public option? Social security, welfare, medicare. How have those programs panned out?
bigskycowboy35 1 year ago
So I'm confused. If this bill is so horrible because it helps the insurance industry so much, why are liberals so proud of themselves for passing it? Is this why the Dems aren't mentioning the bill now that it's election time?
hpd929 1 year ago
here's a statistic...100% of people with any kind of brain want nothing to do with ANY PART of the TAX & JAIL TROJAN HORSE MANDATE for HC that includes no health care in it...100% of the time....... chumps.....
hadenufnow 2 years ago
dude..youre a kook!!!
tmmcgregor369 2 years ago
All of this CBO stuff came from one little point that was made:
You brought up the marginal tax rate of 90% and my whole (and ONLY) point was that if you're going to say that-- you have to look at the WHOLE STORY. We were talking about the top % of earners, which tells a different story than an average.
Yes, the marginal tax rate was 90% but there were MORE loopholes to get through -- so that 90% is misleading.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Comment removed
dsteve040 2 years ago
Lets keep the fights clean & not change the topic from "Whats wrong with our system/healthcare" to "what's wrong with you."
In other words, there is no place in the debate for accusations such as:
"leave the "no nobody does it better than us, if they do they're on their way to Communism, Nazism ... " to the likes of Glenn Beck" It's un-productive.
Reference your sources, and argue your opinion. There are good points on both sides -- no reason to call ppl liar or other names.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Not to mention, our debt is almost 10% of our GDP. This is unprecedented debt.
Also, we're fighting a 2 front war, in the worse recession since the G. Depression, etc and everything else we're currently having to deal with.
NOW of all times, you want to upend the system and give the govt control of an ADDTL 16-18% of our GPD and pay for it with cuts to MEDICARE and higher taxes?
Higher taxes slow job creation. Govt option would slow job creation. Is it REALLY a good idea right now?
dsteve040 2 years ago
I realize that a "Govt option" and a "govt takeover" are different, but several independent studies have showed that the one PROBABLY leads to the other over a matter of a few years with the language written in the most championed HR-3200 bill.
If it's more COMPETITION you want -- govt competiting with private sector - that's GREAT with me. But make it a fair fight -- don't stack it all in the govt's favor with my tax dollars, and then say, "see? private sector sucks!"
THats bullshit.
dsteve040 2 years ago
You want to take it back to healthcare? Fine - I agree, but lets not accuse each other of lying when giving cited statistics. Lets keep it above the belt.
Here is my problem - the current
admin wants to take "something that is imperfect, and replace it with something worse."
THAT is what so many ppl (such as myself) have a problem with. The reason Canada/G.B/others spend such a small amount of their GDP on healthcare is they don't need to come up with anything new - the US handles that.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Back to the topic of this youtube clip, there's something terribly wrong with our healthcare that leaves so many uninsured or suffering & makes a few blood sucking scumbags rich out of their misery.
Instead of religiously holding our sinking ground, let's see what others have done right or wrong and steal the best ideas, like America has always done and leave the "no nobody does it better than us, if they do they're on their way to Communism, Nazism ... " to the likes of Glenn Beck
happyventure 2 years ago
??? WTF?
I am giving you VALID statistics I am pulling off GOVT websites, which I have cited. If you want to dispute them, fine, but give me referrences instead of saying I am just misinforming.
Yes, big evil goldman sachs found loopholes in the system -- on paper they LOST money. Our system is designed so that you get tax benefits for that and thus pay less.
You want to challence the status quo in healthcare - challence the status quo in your LOGIC first.
dsteve040 2 years ago
As for whether the poor or middle-class have it easier in Europe & Canada, yes, yes they do b/c their social safety is more generous, their healthcare is cheaper & more accessible & their min wages are higher. Again you can correctly argue, as the right does in Europe, their unemp rate is higher as a result & they have fewer billionaires. Valid counter punches, but again let's not dispute the obvious
happyventure 2 years ago
Or can we stop talking about tax loopholes being plugged compared to 50's? Do you know how much Goldman Sachs paid in taxes last year? You wanna guess my friend? .... 1% ... ONE FRIGGIN PERCENT!!! (google " bloomberg goldman sachs 2008 tax"). So my friend please don't give me this stuff, again you have enough ammunition in your arsenal not to resort to this
happyventure 2 years ago
dsteve my friend, can we stick with real statistics and the obvious? Otherwise we would be chasing our tail & not worth having a discussion. You can still make valid arguments for merits of free market. But let's accept the obvious truth that the rich is getting richer, their income & dividend taxes got cut & cut & cut again especially during W era, to the degree that even billionaire Warren Buffet blasted the system that lets him pay a tax rate almost 1/2 of what his secretary pays
happyventure 2 years ago
Dsteve my friend, all references that I looked up show the effective tax rates actually coming DOWN from 1979 (couldn't find effective rates going back later than that), and the top marginal tax rates have come down HUGELY since 50's-60's. Where did you see effective taxes go UP? Not only that, I found the change in Average AFTER TAX Income from 79-05. The top 1% saw it grow by 200%, the bottom 5% by less than 10%. See it in epi org, google "CBO data reveal unprecedented inequality"
happyventure 2 years ago
As far as the statistic the disinformation artist does quote--that too is pure bullshit and doctored, but that is too complex a matter to go into here.
These are Trotksyite-Goebbelsians propagandists pure and simple.
Not worth talking to or arguing with.
mopsius 2 years ago
I would, however, like to see where you got your statistic on the % of workforce who work in exportable goods.
I have tried finding it and can find no data on the subject. Please referrence your statistics.
As an aside, did you know that 91.4% of all unrefenced statistics are made up on the spot? lol.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Mopsius said NOTHING about the amount of US exports. That was not the statistic quoted.
Period.
The disinformation artist quotes another staitic and say mopsius statistic is inaccurate.
Old Neo-Con Tactic.
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius,
You are correct -- I went back and reviewed your post -- you said 11% of workers - and I read 11% of GDP.
I owe you an apology for misreading your post -- Im sorry.
That doesn't make me a "misinformation artist" or a "hired hand" for the insurance companies or Repubs or whoever, whose job is to keep an eye on you and Cenk, but that's another issue.
However, my stat is still valid -- we're exporting more than in previous years -- that's moving in the right direction. Disagree?
dsteve040 2 years ago
January 2002 oil= $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel.
Q.E D.
mopsius 2 years ago
yes, yes. I misquote an exact statistic (in full) that I pulled off the Dept of Commerce website.
I'm a "misinformation artist" that was "hired fraudulently" to discredit TYT.
I'll ask again: Who even watches this video anymore? It's OLD. Mopsius, happy, and I are THE ONLY ONES WHO WATCH.
But as I said before, if that theory helps you sleep -- go ahead. Note however how many MORE posts you put up than me.
And again... the RAVING commences in ..5..4..3..2.. and GO!...
dsteve040 2 years ago
La cucaracha, la cucaracha
Ya no puede caminar
Porque no tiene, porque le falta
Marijuana que fumar....
mopsius 2 years ago
Bon appetit, mes enfants.
mopsius 2 years ago
dsteve049 actually seems to believe he is provoking.
A penny ante footsoldier who never looks in the rear view mirror, HAHAHAHAHA.
mopsius 2 years ago
Blackman really overreached himself at Illinois.
Thought the Ivy League was serious football and recruiting, HAHAHAHA.
mopsius 2 years ago
The really hilarious aspect of the Bush and Chgney coalition of Zionist Born Agains, Neo-Cons, and Corporate Fascists is this--anyone of them will sell out the other two at the drop of a hockey puck.
Ain't that right, Paulson baby?
mopsius 2 years ago
Ah, Ivy League Football in the 60's--the first blush of weight training, steroids, and the newly legalized defensive forearm.
They all contributed to the demise of American colelge football as a gentleman's pastime, but that last almost destroyed even the concept of the sport.
You listening Paulson, my man?
mopsius 2 years ago
By the way one is not naive enough not to calculate that the first real bloodshed will likely come from the Right Wing in some form.
But that will fail.
It's a bit like a Mexican Standoff.
Niels Bohr, a fan of American western movies, had the dynamics down pat.
The threeway standoff in "The Good, the Bad, And The Ugly" also bears close logical analysis.
mopsius 2 years ago
Paulson played football for Dartmouth.
The best description of Dartmouth I ever heard was, "a box full of ball bearings. Give them a push and they all start rolling in the same direction."
Paulson, by the way, is a hired hand.
mopsius 2 years ago
dsteve049 is a useful tactical specimen though--check out the kindergarten psychology.
It will be used on you as well.
Just ignore it.
The point is to give the impression of "control", and there is a whole psychological literature on it, including much marketing material.
mopsius 2 years ago
Actually it is a great compliment to Cenk that these folks would find it necessary to assign him his own personal full-time propagandist.
It really doesn't matter much actually.
And youtube is becoming obsolete while other channels open up they know nothing about....
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel.
Not theory--facts.
Meanwhile Goldman Sachs, one of Paulson's fomer employers, and beneficiary of a taxpayer bailout, directlya nd indirectly, makes money hand over fist in currency arbitrage, hahahahaha.
mopsius 2 years ago
dsteve040--fits the pattern of a hyper-Zionist Neo-Con, perhaps posting form NYC or even Tel Aviv.
The Zionists want the US to attack Iran for Israel, and also Pakistan, as mapped out in the Neo-Cons' Plan For the New American Century.
mopsius 2 years ago
US bankruptcy and economic collapse is irrelevant to their purposes--and they move mountains to tell you dumbasses that everything is hunky dory, and that Bush and Cheney did not destroy the economy and get the US bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively a quagmire and a debacle.
Perhaps he is assigned to Cenk not only because of the for profit insurance angle but because Cenk is a Muslim?
Who knows.
mopsius 2 years ago
These folks are little Trotskys and Goebbels, each and every one, as the US and Israeli Rightists are virtual neo-Nazis.
mopsius 2 years ago
Do you not, btw find irony that you refer to me as a "virtual neo-Naz" and in the same breath call me a "hyper-Zionist Neo-Con" who "want the US to attack Iran for Israel"
If i'm Nazi, would I really want to help Israel?
Logic, buddy. You gotta focus on logic.
Go ahead and post 18 comments so that my posts get drowned out.
Rant and rave you fanatic. Rant and rave.
It's like talking to a 5 year old. Logic is irrelevant and the loudest voice wins (you're winning, huh?)
dsteve040 2 years ago
dsteve040, disinformation artist, misquotes the statistic, and then criticizes the accuracy of what was said.
Typical tactic--a completely unscrupulous, lying asshole or a slobbering moron.
Actually they amount to the same thing.
mopsius 2 years ago
dsteve040 is a flack hired fraudulenttly to discredit even the idea of a sane and rational public health insurance as other industrialized countries have had for some long time.
Classic Social Darwinist--of exactly the type that produced Marx and Enegles and both Socialism and Communism as the only remedy.
mopsius 2 years ago
They would have it so.
So be it.
mopsius 2 years ago
Engels
mopsius 2 years ago
And where does all the new debt monies that we printed end up? In boardrooms of Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, United Health... Yeah, and we're supposed to jump up & down chanting "hurray hurray Reaganesque freemarketers"
So I am with you mopsius about our dire state of affairs. Call me a dreamer, but I believe we'll come out of this b/c of our iPod and Tweeter generation, b/c of that persistent drive for excellence, innovation and hope which is in our collective DNA
happyventure 2 years ago
happy:
Where do you get the: "And where does all the new debt monies that we printed end up? In boardrooms of Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobil, United Health..."
I can agree with some of this string of comments, but definetly not that part.
Newlyt printed money is actually put in play through banks - both business and personal loans, withdrawls, etc.
It doesn't go to Exxon or United Health, it goes to you and me. If we PAY these companies, then yes you're right, but that's kinda misleading...
dsteve040 2 years ago
We then resort to more debt (printing money), personally nationally, to buy yet more stuff from them & again we dont produce enough to sell them. Even a larger account deficit. And what do they do with all that extra money?
They buy oil (higher oil prices). They invest in countries that scratch to harm us somehow. They come here and buy land and American companies. And then with their leftover $ they buy treasury bonds, a promise by our government to give them even more money in future
happyventure 2 years ago
But my friend I don't deny that we're losing the lead, if not already. For the past few decades, we've let the captains of profit see to the demise of our industrial infrastructure, we now import everything from computers to our underwear, and in exchange what do we export? Wood pulp and grains, just like a third world country in the 70's. We buy all those things from China & Japan and in exchange we don't have enough for them to buy, so they end up with more of our money (trade account deficit)
happyventure 2 years ago
Exactly --only eleven percent of the US work force even works in areas where exportable goods are produced, and not everything they make is actually exported.
The illusion of US economic "prosperity" hinges on USD being the world reserve currency.
But that is over, and the house of cards is crashing.
The real estate bubble was the last gasp.
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius,
According to the US Dept of Commerce website (latest data):
Exports comprised 11.5% of U.S. GDP in the second quarter of 2007. To put in historical terms, exports were 9.4% of U.S.
GDP five years earlier (Q2 2002), and 5.0% 40 years ago (Q2 1967)
So if you're going to use stats, make sure they are correct, or at least heading in the right direction. Otherwise it really ruins your credibility on a point.
... and the ranting begins... NOW!...
dsteve040 2 years ago
That's where our positive & risk taking attitude comes from. That's why from automobile to airplane to iPod, most innovations have come from America.
Japan, Taiwan or more recently China, have excelled us big time in manufacturing and incremental tech advances. And they have made a loooot of profit in the process, but they don't have much to show in the way of innovation.
Drive for innovation more than anything is a function of culture and attitude, and that's what we have aplenty
happyventure 2 years ago
Well first of all, I asked nicely that you not rant.
Jeez, Are there no manners in crazy land?
Again, using oil as an example is a really bad example -- the mrkt is not limited to the U.S. buying oil. With India and China's economies growing at 12% per annum, there are suddenly a lot more buyers and OPEC controls most supply (thus not free mrkt). 70/barrel is current mrkt equilibrium.
You make an inductive fallacy that free mrkt = oil mrkt and call it logic. When in fact its... FANATICAL.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Technologically and industrially the US is at least 30 years behind Japan.
Maybe 60.
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius, you've some points my friend but you know why I haven't given up on America? B/c of that unique American risk taking attitude & drive for excellence. My friend dsteve attributes that to quest for profit.I have a different view,I think this drive is part of our social DNA which we inherited from those rugged yet hopeful fellows who left Europe for the prospect of a new life halfway across the world.The well to do who were after easy profit stayed behind,the risk takers were who set sail
happyventure 2 years ago
It is not as if there have not been warnings, from incisive systematic economic analysts, for fifty years.
The warnings have been legion.
Some measures which might have worked 30 years ago will no longer work.
Things have gone too far.
Only radical restructuring will avoid chaos.
The incompetent elite is incapable of that.
mopsius 2 years ago
The US infrastructure is obsolete.
Rebuilding an obsolete infrastructure, which Obama says he wants to do, is absurd.
Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats--with a few exceptions--even know where to begin, let alone how.
mopsius 2 years ago
The US will be lucky to survive as a viable Socialist State.
That is the best case scenario.
The chances for the best case scenario are small and none at all at the moment.
mopsius 2 years ago
Expanding the attack in Afghanistan to an eightyear war of occupation was ultimate lunacy.
It will speed up the final collapse.
The US military is both obscenely expensive and completely obsolete.
The only thing they are good for is killing civilians and losing wars.
It has been downhill since Korea, which was draw.
mopsius 2 years ago
The US signed its death warrant--economically, financially, miltiarily, politically, and so forth--invading and occupying Mesopotamia.
mopsius 2 years ago
NATO committed suicide attacking Yugoslavia.
It is now a corpse wandering around Afghanistan looking for 1842.
mopsius 2 years ago
The time for rational solutions is before the vlolence starts.
Once the violence begins it has its own course and rationale, which no one really controls.
mopsius 2 years ago
"There Will Be Blood"--first class flick.
How much?
On verra.
mopsius 2 years ago
"Radical" is a not an ideological designation.
"Radical" comes from the Latin "radix", which means "root".
A radical goes to the roots of things, including economics.
mopsius is definitely a radical in that sense.
mopsius 2 years ago
In September 2008, with the collapse of the whole world economy, oil returned to a supply and demand price in USD and other currencies--roughly three times the price in January 2002 though varying.
There is no US "export economy" to speak of anymore, as Roberts also realizes.
What is exported mainly is war.
And the wars will be lost.
mopsius 2 years ago
US Corporate Fascism is economically incompetent.
Paul Craig Roberts is no Marxist--he has also recognized the US is a predatory capitalism warfare state.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
That's not a theory.
That's the collapse of USD.
mopsius 2 years ago
Nor is a that a Marxist analysis in any way--it is strictly economic analysis.
The Marxist analysis--particularly Lenin's--helps explain why a system would be absurd enough to operate in that way.
Facts are facts.
There is no point in being emotional about them.
What you want or hope is not going to change facts.
The US is over.
mopsius 2 years ago
To quote Wayne Coyne of the Flaming Lips, "You think you're a radical... In fact, you're fanatical... FANATICAL."
So if I'm a "flack", then you're a fanatical "quack".... FANATICAL.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Wow. That's dramatic, mopsius.
Reality called and was upset it missed you. I took a message.
Again, for the 19th time (and please don't start another ranting craze -- it's not very constructive)...
What happens when the US Economy doesn't implode? WHat happens to your theories when you're wrong about, "Either way it does not matter--the US is over."??
Similar to Marx, any nugget of truth will be dismissed as the ravings of a loon when you're proven to be wrong.
dsteve040 2 years ago
USD is no longer the world Reserve Currency.
The world knows. US private big oil knows. The for profit health insurers know. Goldman Sachs and the others who got bailouts know. Mexicans and Canadians know. The only people being kept in the dark are most of the American people, who are going top be asked to pay for the incompetent fuck ups at the top for the next thirty years, and after that their children and grandchildren.
mopsius 2 years ago
Are they that dumb?
Are they so malleable with the right Bernaysian PR?
That's what this flack dsteve040 is all about.
A hired hand.
On verra.
Either way it does not matter--the US is over.
The only question really is how much blood.
mopsius 2 years ago
happy,
I forgot to address something you said.
I agree it was easier to support a family on one income 50 yrs ago, but that's not exactly a fair comparison.
There is a lot more "stuff" that we "need" today than 50 years ago.
...HDTV's, cable television, internet, cell phones, doggy daycare, Indoor climate control, 2.5 cars per family, daycare, retirement communities, gym memberships, country clubs, armani... to name a few.
To say, "things were simpler" is cliche but there is truth to it.
dsteve040 2 years ago
The US is not the largest economy in the world.
It is the largest economy in the world in USD.
In the distinction is the ongoing collapse of the US predatory capitalist warfare state.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius,
we get it with the oil references. It's a poor example of free mrkt, as outlined in previous posts -- move on.
For better or worse, about 1/3 of all products made in the world are purchased and consumed in the US, though we constitute 5% of the world population (World Research Inst.). That makes us the largest economy on any standard - whether you use the USD, the pound, or the Yen.
Yes, yes, evil hateful capitalism. We understand your theme. Thanks for the recap.
dsteve040 2 years ago
I get it -- you don't like the "big evil corporations" and that's fine. However, these are (AGAIN) the exception, not the rule. 99.7% of employer businesses in the US are SMALL business (SBA Office of Advocacy 2009)
That there is corruption, and problems, does not mean the system is bad. Every system as large as ours will have waste.
THese big corps however do fund our 401Ks so that our incomes can be supplemented where SOCIAL SECURITY fails us.
dsteve040 2 years ago
The CBO stats can be found at CBO wbsite. Google "Historical Effective Tax Rates".
The rift btwn the richest and poorest is huge, yes, and the system isn't perfect. However, most ppl have more financially than their grandparents. Does that mean the system is failing us? We're wealthier individually AND as a nation.
Poor us that our poorest of poor can't afford to buy TVs and homes. What's your point? Is it better in Canada? EU?
Everywhere has poverty, and US has less than most countries.
dsteve040 2 years ago
If Goldman Sachs execs get billions of bonus,that's good.Perhaps one day your kid can work there.If to boost profit Cigna denies care to your dying mom,it's good.Perhaps you can buy their stock in your 401k.If we've lost our industrial base for a massive debt to China,it's good,you can now afford a big LCD TV
Is this the promise of pursuit of happiness this nation was founded on? Is all that's left of our patriotism empty chants of USA,USA shaking the #1 foam finger...that's made in China?
happyventure 2 years ago
Cheer up, happyventure, the US is all over.
And the way the Democrats and Republicans and financial and military and industrial and US other elites are going full speed ahead with blinders on there is no possibility of reform or restructuring.
They'll all get their shot all right.
mopsius 2 years ago
You said it perfectly, we've become a society where "everybody has a shot". We've become a bunch of greedy pricks in front of Vegas slot machines
Those on the top,execs of Goldman Sachs,Exxon,United Health ... are doing everything in their power to turn their $100 million take homes to $1, $10, $100 billions no matter how many pensions or homes they destroy, how many rivers they pollute or how many sick they kill. And the rest of us are just happy to have a shot at one day becoming like them
happyventure 2 years ago
Not able to keep up with inflation, this segment of pop resorted to more & more debt to buy everything from TVs to homes, that their stagnant wages couldn't provide. While our politicians boasted about the GDP growth that all that new wealth(=new debt) created.
Eventually what price did they pay for the error of not reading the fine print on page 27 of their loan contract? THEY LOST THEIR HOMES. What did the bank execs get for their errors? $100 million severance packages. How American.
happyventure 2 years ago
As an aside, if you buy a home you cant afford and lose it -- that's NOT your mortgage companies fault.
Look at the banks now - do you think they WANT all these houses back? Of course not -- they're going under because of all of this & would prefer you pay back the money you borrowed to buy your stuff. After all, you did say you would pay it back when you borrowed it.
This attitude that we should protect ppl from themselves is absurd. You make a promise and break it -- now your a victim??
dsteve040 2 years ago
My friend, you also cited CBO stats (where do you get them BTW?) to claim disparity b/w poor & rich has shrunk compared to 60's and I cite the highest concentration of wealth in the top 1%, now owning about 40% of the pie, as the proof of the opposite. But just ask your grandparents if it was easier to provide for a family, food, shelter,college, with a single income in the 50's or today
And you know what gets the bottom 50% going? The greatest innovation of Capitalism: CREDIT CARD
happyventure 2 years ago
There are parallels with the British--but right now the best analogy is the collapse of Austro-Hungary.
Depending on various contingencies Weimar may not be far behind.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
mopsius 2 years ago
happy,
This one is really important: One of the premises of your argument is flawed:
"the smaller poverty gap back then". According to the US Census wbsite, In 1960 the poverty level was 20.7%, and in 2006 was only 10.6 (last posted year).
Is that not progress in the right direction? Is our country, as a whole, so much worse? With 50% less ppl in poverty?
You hold this point up as your shining light of the perils of capitalism, but the stats dont support it.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Hey dsteve, sorry for delay. Quickly, You say there are no longer scientists like Einstein who innovate for love of science & not money? Google "Americans Nobel medicine 2009" to see the 3 American Univ Profs who just won Nobel for Medicine. Also search "Greatest Canadian" in Wiki to see that the father of universal healthcare in Canada got the title in TVed national survey. Why would Canadians hold him is such high esteem if their system is so miserable? BTW Gretzky ended up 10th :)
happyventure 2 years ago
happy,
I'm not saying curiosity doesn't ever lead to knowledge, or that no one would learn anything new without corporate backing, but the exception doesn't disprove the rule.
OK, 3 profs got the nobel prize -- but what about the teams of scientists Pfizer employs to come up with better heart medicines, or the scientists and engineers Siemens employee that come up with the new/better machine that detects heart defects in infants.
These corps want profit, but is it less productive or noble?
dsteve040 2 years ago
Yes there are a lot of loopholes in our current tax system, but not NEARLY as much. The restucturing of how you can take capital gains ALONE changed the "effective tax rate" significantly.
This is significant I'm talking comparison here between 70s and today. The CBO keeps records of this, and the effective rate for the upper brackets has dropped 8-10%.
Don't skew what I post -- I didn't say its an airtight system now, but that touted "90% marginal tax rate" is misleading.
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy,
Canadas lack of doctors or "shortcomings" in medicine are not a function ofthe "underinvestment in training health specialists", it's a function of controling compensation. Canada loses a lot of doctors to the U.S. who move here to make more money.
dsteve040 2 years ago
There is no such thing as a "free market" nor any such thing as a completely controlled economy.
mopsius 2 years ago
And this one is the best yet: you argue that the fate of poor & sick in Europe & US is...eh,the same. This is,my friend, your attempt to convince yourself, thru tortured logic and imagination, that our super-Capitalist society is no more brutal, selfish & inhumane than other western democracies. The all holy Capitalism has brought us all the progress and happiness in the world and not any noticeable misery, at least as compared to Europeans.This is the mother of all religious Kool-Aids my friend
happyventure 2 years ago
And again your are right--US hyper-Capitalism as Jim Jones'Kool-Aid.
mopsius 2 years ago
To your last rant, "you argue that the fate of poor & sick in Europe & US is...eh,the same... The all holy Capitalism has... religious Kool-Aids my friend"
No, I don't argue that EU or US are the same. As from previous posts, I'm proud of our differences. Not that poor suffer, but that we are diff.
Again, I go back to my argument from before -- if we are so brutal, why do so many ppl come here?
This is the "land of opportunity" where everyone gets a shot at the big time.
dsteve040 2 years ago
My friend I'm sorry but I call you religiously Capitalist b/c of comments like "actual taxes in 60's & 70's were lower b/c of loopholes", as if there are no loopholes right now or the 90% tax rate had no impact on the smaller poverty gap back then. Or that I have to ask you to google "forbes happiest places 2009" to see the top 10 happiest nations,with the exception of Canada and NZ, are all European
As if this was not self evident from their long vacations,social system and less stressful life
happyventure 2 years ago
As for Canadian health care, just ask your friend who Canadians view as the greatest Canadian. It's Tommy Douglas, who introduced the universal health care. As for shortcomings of their system in the last decade, you can verify with him agaion, it was not because of the public insurance declined coverage as is the case with the blood sucking private ins in this country, it was rather because of underinvestment in training health specialists in the 90's
happyventure 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
mopsius 2 years ago
To amend my last statement, it's not just CT scans, but anything more intense than a broken bone or common sickness is when they have problems.
The chance of surviving cancer is much lower in Canada than U.S.
Moving on, why the arbitrary line at production that govt shouldn't cross? Dont they have a stake in GM? Isn't that production?
I know - thats a bailout but it's still a stake in production no matter how you look at it.
So why the line at healthcare? Why is THAT the line in the sand?
dsteve040 2 years ago
dsteve, I dont want to dwell on this any longer, but it all started when you equated "profit=innovation". I don't deny scientists & innovators would like handsome compensation but their main driver,from Newton to Einstein, has been curiosity not MONEY. The correlation b/w profit and innovation is very loose at best. Execs at AIG, Goldman Sachs, Bernie Madoff and dozen or so traders on Wall Street each made billions last year. That's a lot of profit, show me the innovation
happyventure 2 years ago
You are , happyventure. In fact, profit almost always works in the reverse--stifling innovation.
The exceptions are when something new already discovered is bought out--but again the profiteers don't innovate.
"There Will Be Blood" has a connected subtheme.
mopsius 2 years ago
Hey mopsius, I don't dispute that many hi-tech or pharma companies spend about 25% of their revenue on R&D. That would result in innovations in some cases. But even in the industry this is a known fact. People who start a hitech company JUST FOR THE MONEY will fail. The common wisdom is that you must LOVE and scratch for the technology you work on, curosity instinct as I call it, to be successful. Money will then follow. So again, all I'm disputing is the blanket statement profit=innovation.
happyventure 2 years ago
The figures are misleanding though--25% on RD focused not necessarily on finding something new but on finding what is profitable.
The modern history of phramaceuticals is a fascinating story actually, and not what the drug companies would like everyone to see it as.
There are also cases of actually trying to find a use for "new products" they happen to have--something like inventing diseases to match.
But this is a can of worms--much more complex than public Health Insurance.
mopsius 2 years ago
RD is absolutely important, however--you are right.
But even there private, for profit R&D is much more limited than R&D in other contexts, in universities or government or private and non-profit, where the goal is discovery, not a discovery that is immediately significant for the bottom line.
Here the Japanese are way ahead of the US, as Germany has traditionally been (excepting the NAZI's, whose bottomline was secret weapons).
mopsius 2 years ago
"Monetary" or "corporate" PROFIT is a very limiting, near-sighted, and often disastrous concept, even for some of the corporations.
mopsius 2 years ago
US hyper-capitalism is in collapse--however one analyses it--and the Social Darwinist Right are just making it quicker and more catastrophic.
Kucincich's non-profit public Health Care Insurance Corporation woud actually stimulate the economy exactly where it needs to be stimulated.
But the "captialists" can't see that.
The for private Health Insurers are economic parasites pure and simple, which is not true of all for profit insurance however.
mopsius 2 years ago
happy, I seem to be scratching the nerve now.
Ok, here goes: Who are the new "Netwons and Einsteins"? Are there any? No - now they are funded by private companies and the rate of technological growth is MUCH higher.
As to who is the greatest Canadian, I'm pretty sure my friend would say Wayne Gretzky.
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy,
I told you that my friend is Canadian, and obviously I asked his opinion on all of this.
He is for private insurance (vs. single payer) because of rationed care. His comment was that the Canadian system is great if you've got the flu, but if you need a CT, you might wait 6 days, 6 weeks, or 6 months -- you just don't know.
His comment was, "That really sucks if you need a CT, because you might not have 6 weeks, so you go to the U.S. and pay for it."
Our system screws the sick?
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy, to your:
Why should we surrender happier, longer, healthier life to Europeans just as a means of distinction?... drive for excellence... instead of our screwing the poor & sick.
Who says Europeans are happier? The studies I have heard have shown the reverse and lifestyle has a lot to do with longevity.
As to screwing the sick - does Europe not do that through rationing care? Thats a problem with both systems in diff. ways.
I think what you say here sounds great but is impractical
dsteve040 2 years ago
How can you be proud of America DESPITE Joe the Plumber? That was VERY American of him.
I will agree the gap btwn rich and poor is an issue, but it is one that must be handled carefully so as not to stifle that which makes us great. And yes, it is the loss of uniqueness AND the loss of freedom I am worried about.
Lets be fair, when taking 60s and 70s, the marginal tax rate was higher, but there were also a TON of loopholes, and the effective tax rate was LOWER than today.
dsteve040 2 years ago
And I'm still waiting on your answer my friend. If health ins is a commodity like wheat or coffee then why haven't margins of 5% materialized yet in bigger states with lots of competition? And even at that not-yet-existent 5%, why give something away only to get a portion of it back through taxes or charity for NO BENEFIT? Also there's an inherent conflict of interest in private ins, their main goal is profit and not the welfare of society. The more they deny claims the higher their profit
happyventure 2 years ago
You asked a valid question: if Gov is to enter the health ins arena what prevents it from getting into shelter building, manufacturing... Because Gov is not meant to do everything, especially when it comes to production. The inefficient industries must be allowed to die and Gov protection prevents that. Gov is, however, responsible to preserve rights and guarantee the welfare of the society. Access to basic health care falls under both categories just like public education or justice system
happyventure 2 years ago
Do you think in the 60's & 70's,with 90% top marginal tax rate & much smaller gap b/w rich and poor,we looked less American? Weren't we still, and to a higher degree, land of opportunity? Didn't we have big corporations or wealthy individuals back then? Why should we surrender happier, longer, healthier life to Europeans just as a means of distinction?I'd rather stay distinct thru our tireless optimism, love of justice & freedom and drive for excellence... instead of our screwing the poor & sick
happyventure 2 years ago
I am with you on the greatness of this country and I'm proud of it despite Glenn Beck or Joe the Plumber. But I don't understand why the price of freedom is to have such a huge gap between "haves and have-nots"? How are other western countries with a smaller poverty gap less free? Perhaps it's not the loss of freedom, rather losing the uniqueness of our character and Americanism that you're worried about?
happyventure 2 years ago
The US is a predatory capitalist warfare state.
There is no other way to read the last fifty years--politically, financially, economically, or socially.
Simple as that.
Get that through your head and you may be ready to do something about and for yourself and your children and grandchildren.
Can''t do that--Vietnam repeats over and over and over and over again, as well as no pubic health and every other form of Social Darwinist fraud.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
mopsius 2 years ago
And so to answer your actual question: What do PRIVATE insurance companies bring to the table:
The same as any other private company. What does a private homebuilder bring to the table? Couldn't a govt. org, who could get much better economies of scale, do a better job? Don't ppl NEED shelter?
Private companies creates jobs. Private companies pay taxes. Private companies fund charities.
To beat a dead horse, private enterprises keep each other honest if there is enough open competition.
dsteve040 2 years ago
dsteve, yes you're right you've said in the past that you're in favor of some form of reigning in free market through regulations. I think when you started talking about Communism, Russia, inferiority of Canada, scientists thru history have invented because they were after money... you sounded like Rudi Giuliani or Sarah Palin who advocate less regulation. And I apologize if I haven't hit all of your points, I have hogged this forum already as is. Let me know what I missed and I try
happyventure 2 years ago
happy,
Couple of things here -- these are getting longer so we might have to switch to direct youtube emails soon.
To cut to the point, I think we fundamentally disagree on one point: You believe that scientists invent regardless of profits, and I disagree.
I don't 100% disagree -- obviously there are altruistic actions, but look at the speed of progress in the 20th/21st that occurs when the modern big evil capitalistic machine starts paying ppl for their innovation -- it's remarkable
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy, to my "lecture about the merits of health insurance", you asked what role the insurance companies play.
If I didnt interpret it correctly, maybe you misworded the question.
However, my scenarios of competition are not "imaginary". Look at other commodities, which you can make a GREAT argument that health insurance is nothing but a commodity. See what kind of margins appear in commonly traded commodities. NOT 20%, 30%, etc.
dsteve040 2 years ago
(cont)
and the US is also wealthiest, most successful, most hated (but also emulated) country.
More ppl immigrate to the US than ANY other country because it's "the land of opportunity."
The price you pay for this freedom is that there are haves and have-nots. It's like show-biz, you can make it big or you can fall on your ass, but everyone gets a shot at the big time.
So my point is, I don't want the US to become like "everybody else" and lose what makes it great.
dsteve040 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 barrel.
mopsius 2 years ago
By the way about Canada, hear it from someone who's lived there for more than a decade. They, with 1/10 of our population, have created a wonderful country out of that otherwise frozen wasteland. And from basketball, to snowmobil & jetski, to Insulin to AM radio, pager, Blackberry and Java language their innovations are nothing to sneeze at
happyventure 2 years ago
I ask about the value of PRIVATE health insurance and you lecture me about the merits of health insurance in general, as if I am against the concept. You resort to imaginary scenarios where competition would bring down corp profit to 5% ignoring the fact that CA & NY are a country in their own right with more than ample competition, how come margins are not at 5% there? And even at that imaginary 5% the question remains. WHY? What do ins co's give back in return?
happyventure 2 years ago
If there are societies like Canada where people are happier, healthier, live longer, have longer paid vacations, lower incarceration and crime rates and yet have a lot of millionaires and billionaires, well there MUST be something wrong with them. Aha they are on their way to communism, and if it hasn't happened already it's because of proximity to US. So based on that logic Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany ... haven't turned communist because? ... Their proximity to Queen Elizabeth perhaps?
happyventure 2 years ago
happy,
Look, don't get hung up on Canada with what I'm saying here.
WHat I said was an off-handed remark to something you said, and it is certainly not the meat of my argument. One of my best friends and his wife are Canadian. They still call it home, although they love the US.
Sure, there are plenty of spots on the spectrum btwn Capitalism and COmmunism, but here is my point:
For better or worse, the U.S. is the only place in the developed world where capitalism is SO widespread... (cont)
dsteve040 2 years ago
When this vulgar capitalism collapses spectacularly bringing down the entire global economy, wiping out retirement savings, throwing millions out of their homes, and then crawls on its knees to that big bad government begging to save it, you say it wasn't its fault. No, No, No, the reason must be somewhere else. Gov was the reason. Oh even better, it was lack of deregulation. Just like excuses a religious person would give when faced with evidence that earth is not flat
happyventure 2 years ago
To your comment: "When this vulgar capitalism collapses ... you say it wasn't its fault".
That is absolutely NOT the case. I would not make such a bold claim.
Capitalism is a very volatile system, and subject to wild swings. I have also never claimed that is was for LACK of deregulation.
Like dynamite, capitalism is very volatile but also very powerful.
I have said repeatedly that I think govts job is to "regulate and govern". Check previous posts.
dsteve040 2 years ago
800B for banks, 11.2 TRILLION to kick start the economy, 17.5% real unemployment including those who gave up or part timers--our answer to this expenditure is, give insurance co's more money and screw the poor or those inbetween jobs, now, yes, 17.5%.
I have never been more ashamed of Congress or America for allowing this to be our priority. The friggin FRENCH do it better.
Depressing and rightfully so.
Yourdeadmeat69 2 years ago
Hear, hear--Yourdeadmeat69.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel.
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius,
That's like the 5th time you've posted the price of a barrel of oil between those 2 dates. So what?
You're picking an EXTREME high and an EXTREME low as an example. Now it's hovering around $70/barrel -- that's EQUILIBRIUM.
But still, oil is far from a FREE mrkt. It's a commodity, but a cartel controls 60%+ of the oil production in the world.
Supply AND Demand have to both be unhindered for it to be a free mrkt. It's a poor example but you love it because you think it makes a point.
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy,
As to what role exactly the insurance co's offer:
They limit your liability to risk in the case of a medical emergency. You pay a premium to limit what you would pay in an emergency. If it is mismanaged, thats a different problem.
In a truly competitive environment, a 20% profit wouldnt happen. MAYBE 5% -- similar to commodities.
Insurance is insurance, it's not intel vs. amd, it's an FL orange vs CA orange. It's a commodity so it would trade as such if mrkt was allowed to control.
dsteve040 2 years ago
dsteve, sorry for invoking religion again, but you know my friend a reasonable person starts with logic and his belief follows. A religious diehard starts with a belief and then struggles to drag logic along. Capitalism is like a religion to you conservatives. You view challenging it blasphemy and see dissidents as worshippers of communism. I ask if we have become a greedy savage society and you bring up Russia as alternative, a chewed-up Soviet leftover, as if our choices are just b/w these two
happyventure 2 years ago
happy, I'm not offended you invoke religion (I think its a red herring, but not insulting), but I am insulted that the reason for the comparison is your claim, "A religious diehard starts with a belief and then struggles to drag logic along".
I don't know how more logical I can be. I'm giving you statistics to back up my claims; how is that not logical?
No offense meant, but it seems here that you have TOTALLY sidestepped my arguments and are now nipping at the fringes of the discussion.
dsteve040 2 years ago
To your:
"If animal instinct is our dominant driver, we'll be mostly thinking about ourselves and our own profit & not giving a rat's hoot about anything outside of our immediate circle..."
Even *if* this is true, thinking of yourself can help others.
The guy who came up with the compact fluorsescent lightbulb -- what if he ONLY cared about a proft? That still saves resources and helps our planet. Win-win.
Rush Limbaugh is a WINDBAG, but he gives a lot to charity. Food for thought.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Debt credit creates nothing.
Just the reverse.
mopsius 2 years ago
January 2002 oil = $19 per barrel
August 2008 oil = $147 per barrel
Bon appetit, mes enfants.
mopsius 2 years ago
Socialism is nothing but capitalism for the lower classes.
Oswald Spengler
mopsius 2 years ago
Back to healthcare(sorry for my longwinded rant), I ask you my friend, other than taking a 30% profit (or let's say 20% in your super-competitive no-state-barrier environment), what benefit does a private health ins company have for the society?
FedEx ships packages. Intel makes computer chips. Pfizer makes pills. But what service does a private health ins company provide?
And a big picture question, which instinct do you think is the dominant driver in our current capitalist system?
happyventure 2 years ago
happy,
As an example:Competition/Capitalism is shown to produce innovation and results. Lets examine socialist state Russia -- the only innovations they achevied were when competing with US. (arms/space/etc.)
They were GREATLY lagging in everyday commodities and luxuries (such as television, automobiles, etc.)
dsteve040 2 years ago
happy,
As to the ratios of CEO pay to employee.
Ok, granted -- thats unfair, but lets look at other stats:
According to the US Census website:
The % of pop in poverty is SIGNIFICANTLY down in the last 50 years. Over 10% of families make 100K+ a year.
If the middle class is shrinking, it means that more ppl are joining the upper class.
You'd have to pay me a lot to sit in the hotseat of CEO - if you fail, you're screwed forever in getting a job. I would need compensation for that too.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Now I agree that corporations provide capital necessary to achieve goals that any one of our instincts might pursue
Fine by me as long as the corporations serve a purpose for the society other than lining the pockets of their owners. And I will become an avid proponent of capitalism if employees and workers have a broader ownership of corporations and share the profit
That way you can have your free market my friend while I won't fret over a gradual march towards capitalistic dictatorship
happyventure 2 years ago
Corporations do not "provide capital necessary to achieve goals that any of our instincts might pursue."
mopsius 2 years ago
happy,
To your comment :" Fine by me as long as the corporations serve a purpose for the society ... And I will become an avid proponent of capitalism if employees ... share the profit" (shortened for space)
Corp serve many roles including jobs/income for society so that they can pay taxes to run our govt.
As to ownership, employees are often offered stock options, etc. and employees have the right to buy stocks -- should the employees also then be liable to pay out if a company LOSES money?
dsteve040 2 years ago
Mother Teresa or Jonas Salk, the inventor of Polio vaccine who forewent his patent and profit rights, are examples of those with dominant human instinct
And scientists & engineers who eat pizza for breakfast and spend 20hrs/day in front of a computer to solve a problem or make a new invention are mainly driven by their curiosity instinct
I would argue my friend, that most of inventions and innovations in the human history were driven by the human and curiosity instincts more than profit
happyventure 2 years ago
Tesla.
mopsius 2 years ago
happy,
I have to disagree with your post about Mother Teresa types being the driving force behind innovation.
I would say those are the exceptions, rather than the rule. Most new inventions are created by ppl or teams funded by private corporations who get well compensated for their work. Corps fund in hope of a new/better product to sell FOR PROFIT.
I doubt these individuals would go to all of the trouble for free. Although some would, again I think this is the exception, not the rule.
dsteve040 2 years ago
We all have different degrees of these necessary instincts that define our personality & sense of morality. If animal instinct is our dominant driver, we'll be mostly thinking about ourselves and our own profit & not giving a rat's hoot about anything outside of our immediate circle, whether it's people getting crushed in the society or the planet we trash for our own pleasure.You know people like Rush Limbaugh or Angelo Mozilo
happyventure 2 years ago
Before commenting on your "profit=innovation" let's examine the instincts that drive us humans in life. One could say there are 3 of them:
Animal instinct: the strive to selfserve and survive at any cost
Human instinct: noble values beyond self interest
Curosity instinct: that pesky drive to learn and figure things out
happyventure 2 years ago
Nah--Mammalian instinct--drive to survive as species and evolve, cooperation, long nurturing period, cooperation, group consciousness
Symbolic instinct--abstraction, art, representation, number, science
Human instinct--selfishness, materialism, abstract prophetic religion and state, murder, war, genocide, the individual, greed, capitalism, nuclear world war, end of species.
mopsius 2 years ago
happy:
Wow. I asked for comment, and you certainly delivered. If I don't hit all the points and answer you, I'm sorry. There is a lot here.
I don't have an answer formulated as to what insticts a human being has. I approach the problem from a different angle: what has history shown us that produced results.
See my example below.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches"
wiki
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius:
Therefore, it must be false? That's a logic fallacy to assume that just because it occurs enough to warrant someone referring to it as law does not therefore make it false.
Besides, I already TOLD you, I work for the for-profit health industry. Jeez, I've said it like 50x -- the worst - most evil - most vile one you can think of, whichever one that is.
Because I disagree someone must be paying me, right? I couldnt POSSIBLY just disagree vehemently, right?. WHat a cop-out.
dsteve040 2 years ago
The accumulated predicates in regard to "dsteve040" reach critical mass.
mopsius 2 years ago
In the end future historians will look back and see the US as a flash in the pan.
Even more so than the British,
mopsius 2 years ago
mopsius,
Thats great -- that was like a 4 hour rant. Are you practicing for the UN talks?
Look, just because you didn't get your dream job after you dropped out of college after 3 semesters because you were "just too smart" and so "couldn't focus" doesn't mean the system has failed.
That means *YOU* have failed. Quit blaming the US (where even poor ppl are FAT) for your problems.
YOu remind me of The Flaming Lips, "You think you're a radical, but you're not - you're fanatical... FANATICAL"
dsteve040 2 years ago
mopsius,
what's so funny aout all this is that you do EXACTLY what you have previously accused me of, which is posting so much that you're posts get hidden. Take a look -- you posted like 45 posts last night.
I'll say again, you could just ANSWER my questions instead of ranting and we might all get something out of this.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU'RE WRONG AND THE US DOESNT COLLAPSE?
I'll also say again that it's good you are the extreme minority, because you're loony... FANATICAL.
dsteve040 2 years ago
Invest in War! Buy War Afghanistan Bonds!
mopsius 2 years ago
The US is a slash and burn economy based on infinite debt credit.
Labor is just another element slashed and burned.
It has lasted this long only because USD was the world reserve currency.
It is no longer.
End of story.
RIP USA.
mopsius