Vote!

[Brooklyn Luckfield]

What's even better are people claiming they'll move to Canada to escape Obama's new healthcare and other parts of his "socialist" agenda.

I've heard this stuff as well Hobo and it's a shame, I think people should at least give him chance and what makes this even funnier is, he's not in office yet lol.

No no no.

It's funny because Canada is far more liberal than the US is, and has had National Healthcare and all that for quite some time.  Their conservative party is more liberal than our Democratic Party.

ah, gotcha. Went right over my head lol.

[Bllue]

I think it's total hipocrasy that we're supposed to be capitalistic but peole want more government services.... >_>

[EyeOfPain]

I believe that has more to do with the size of the federal government, rather than our economic system.

[Big Money]

I believe that has more to do with the size of the federal government, rather than our economic system.

you'd think so, wouldn't you

but the government has been pretty huge lately, and services have been trending down

as far as I know (I'm not a business major or anything) it is perfectly possible to have a (somewhat*) free market economy and a government that provides plenty of services through taxation; the only fudgy area is when the government subsumes an industry or part of it into itself: see the United States Postal Service. But you've got other options there, too, like UPS and sech, which are allowed to exist along with the government controlled one

which is to say that while there is (or might be (or there has been an observed)) correlation between economic principles and social programs, one is not (necessarily) causal to the other

[Hobo]

There's also the fact that were the Federal Government to act in a completely Free Market Capitalism way, they would still need to give its citizens things as reasons to not reside in other nations, just like any company can't do nothing for its workers, because they'd quit.

[EyeOfPain]

which is to say that while there is (or might be (or there has been an observed)) correlation between economic principles and social programs, one is not (necessarily) causal to the other

Isn't that what I said?

With all the military spending that's gone on in the past couple years, the economy really should be in much better shape than it is.

[Big Money]

which is to say that while there is (or might be (or there has been an observed)) correlation between economic principles and social programs, one is not (necessarily) causal to the other

Isn't that what I said?

With all the military spending that's gone on in the past couple years, the economy really should be in much better shape than it is.

Not sure, I had thought you meant bigger gov't --> more services, which is on the surface somewhat logical. At least, more logical that smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

[EyeOfPain]

smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

It's called "efficiency".

[Hobo]

smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

It's called "efficiency".

...

[Big Money]

smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

It's called "efficiency".

...

[DOMON KASSHU!]

smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

It's called "efficiency".

...

This.
Gundam Fight Set! Ready... Go!

[R. Daniel 01]

What's even better are people claiming they'll move to Canada to escape Obama's new healthcare and other parts of his "socialist" agenda

Oh lordy this is rich. First because the tables have turned--I remember many democrats saying they'd move to Canada or Europe to escape another four years of Bush, though of course nobody did that. Second, it's gross because of the ignorance that Hobo pointed up.

I think it's total hipocrasy that we're supposed to be capitalistic but people want more government services.... >_>

It's not really hypocrisy. Pure capitalism and pure socialism don't really exist. It's more a question of what you tend towards. Europe seems the closest to a happy medium.

Also, the person wanting free market probably isn't the same person that's asking for more government services. I think you're lumping people together too quickly.


This, I feel, could open up into an interesting discussion of what separates a business from a government. I'm inclined to say that there isn't much of a difference, except that governments have more moral obligations. Also, I guess in structure, governments have more structural variety. Otherwise, I see many similarities.

National identity is the company label!

[The Big Finale]

What's even better are people claiming they'll move to Canada to escape Obama's new healthcare and other parts of his "socialist" agenda

Oh lordy this is rich. First because the tables have turned--I remember many democrats saying they'd move to Canada or Europe to escape another four years of Bush, though of course nobody did that. Second, it's gross because of the ignorance that Hobo pointed up.

I have a friend whose father says he's going to do this, since Obama is the new President and said father is a hardcore srs bsns Republican.

Except, replace 'Canada' with 'Costa Rica'.

Ignoring that Costa Rica is actually highly liberal.

So, yeah.

[Hobo]

If he's got enough American dollars, he can probably do whatever he wants in Costa Rica.

That might just be my ignorance and assumptions on how Central America works, though.

[Roger Smith]

I really don't see this election as a good thing.

Barack Obama spent his teen years as a drug casualty.

He spent his adult years immersing himself in Marxist ideology, hanging out with the powerful crooks, radicals and yes, terrorists in Chicago. Supported by some pretty shady characters to say the least like William Ayers and Rashid Khalidi to get elected to the Illinois Senate, he was absent, missed meetings, and voted "present" about 130 times.  The equivalent of "I don't know."  This pattern continued in the U.S. Senate.  I have to wonder about a candidate endorsed by members of the PLO, Hamas and the leadership of Iran.

Joe Biden is a piece of work too.  A guy reputedly with an IQ of more than 140 but who plagiarised his way through life, first with Syracuse University Law School, and then politically by lifting entire sections of speeches delivered by Robert Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey and even British Labor Party leader Neal Kinnock among others.  Maybe Obama found something of a soul mate, as his own speeches were littered with examples lifted from George Bush's speeches from his 2000 campaign run.  And then there's the fact that Biden just flat out makes stuff up.  Half of his "facts" in the vice-presidential debates were skewed or complete fabrications, but that's just what Joe Biden does routinely.

If this wasn't bad enough, the democrats who are the epitome of deficit spending are now in control of our economy.  And I mean in a huge and very bad way.  The top five contributors from failed government-sponsored financial enterprise Fannie Mae to members of Congress include Barack Obama, who is number three.  Barney Frank, House Financial Services Committee Chair who oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was a lover of one of their officers, a guy named Herb Moses. Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's pick for chief of staff, was a long time democrat arm twister in the House and served on the board of Freddie Mac.  So is it any surprise that when President Bush and Senator McCain tried to force Congressional attention on the problems of these financial institutions years ago, the democrats protected their sacred pig?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate leader Harry Reid want to spend even MORE of our money to give out to industry giants such as the Big Three automakers among many, many others, even after the 700 billion plus stimulus package.  When prominent democrat Senator Chris Dodd, of all people, cautions that we're spending too much of the taxpayer's money - our money for those who actually work for a living - you know somethinbg's wrong in Washington.  And Obama has insanely expensive plans for far more government programs, while saying nothing about the expensive joke known as Social Security, doomed to die from bankruptcy not too far in the future.  When the people who gave us the economic collapse of 2008 are completely in charge in 2009, how can you not conclude that the patients are now running the asylum?

The Stock Market has been telling us for a few weeks now how enthusiastic they are about the future administration.  Pundits have been offering excuses about consumer confidence, lack of credit and unemployment figures, but we've had worse before.  When you just aren't sure what Obama, Pelosi and Reid are going to do with the country, when they wouldn't do anything to stop a catastrophy they knew was coming, perhaps even allowing it in order to win power, why would you want to put your money out where these people can grab it?