OT: does obama bring change?

[1bad65]

We're still working on it.

Some things that have been shown to work for this:

-Provide medical services at no charge for the public.
-Provide education at no charge for the public.

No charge? Dude, EVERYONE pays for those services. It's called taxes.

-Subsidise agricultural expenses to reduce the cost of locally produced produce.

We do that already. And we subsidize tobacco too, while crying about the ills of it. And we tax it like mad. Hypocracy on parade.

-Nationalise resource industries (lumber, oil, water, etc.)
-Tax "generational wealth"

Nationalizing=fail. China is going away from it, and the USSR was bankrupted.

-Tax income including (especially) income from capital gains

Do you have any idea what this will do to our ecomony right now? Even Clinton wasn't dumb enough to do that. He actually lowered them.

-Assist the operation and growth of small businesses employing locals and providing goods or services to locals

Actually Comrade Obama plans to raise their taxes.

[QUOTE=SimonM;923907]-Of course if somebody tried to do all this in the USA they would get accused of socialism. [/QUOTE

Because it is.

-Heck you try to build roads and they call you a socialist it seems.

That's not why we call him that. I did when he himself said we need to "Spread the wealth around".

-Of course somebody who WANTED to do all those things would probably not MIND being called a socialist.

For some reason, Comrade Obama doesn't like being called one. Too bad, the shoe fits.

[BoulderDawg]

40% don't pay because they don't work or don't own property. why should they pay?

Probably because a large number of these people are under 18 and over 65.

[SimonM]

Again, name ONE capitalist country that has government imposed food rationing.

I could name plenty that just let their poor starve.

[BoulderDawg]

At least the one good thing about Bush in Canada is that if he gets sick up there he'll be able to get medical attention without any trouble.

[SimonM]

Because we have a neo-con bootlick at the helm of canadian governance right now.

In fact, W's first appearance since leaving office is gonna be in Canada. lol
In our most conservative and right wing of provinces. In one of our most conservative cities, Calgary.

he's doing an invitation only 400$ a plate dinner talk.

again with the invitation only BS. ah well.

here's the funny thing, people from all over Canada are mailing their shoes in for a planned protest at the site where Bush will be mangling the english language in a so called speech.

can't wait to see the news about what happens at this boneheaded event.

oh alberta, why are you such idiots? *sigh*

Your summary is succinct and correct.

[SimonM]

No charge? Dude, EVERYONE pays for those services. It's called taxes.

Everyone pays a fair share... that's the point!

We do that already. And we subsidize tobacco too, while crying about the ills of it. And we tax it like mad. Hypocracy on parade.

Now tobacco is one crop I wouldn't support the subsidization of. Local foods for local consumption. That is what should be getting subsidies, not export crops, not luxury crops and not non-foodstuff crops.

Nationalizing=fail. China is going away from it, and the USSR was bankrupted.

China is going away from it because of that piece of human feces called Deng Xiaoping.

USSR was bankrupted by wars. Their economic stance aside they were terribly expansionist throughout the entire history of the country. That - more than the nature of their industries - was the problem.

There is no compelling evidence that governments can't handle their own resources.

Do you have any idea what this will do to our ecomony right now? Even Clinton wasn't dumb enough to do that. He actually lowered them.

Again there is no compelling proof that increasing personal income tax or the capital gains tax would harm the economy.

Especially capital gains. At best capital gains are simply money given as rewards for having disposable money. At worst they are fraudulent schemes designed to divest others of their hard-earned money.

To be blunt taxation of personal income is one of the easiest ways to do precisely what I've been advocating all along - reduce systemic inequity.

Though actually there is one tax I like more than the capital gains tax. That is the estate tax.

Large inheritances just encourage wasteful, self-centered, selfish, incomptetent rich familial oligarchs who contribute nothing to the greater good and whose sense of self-entitlement is more rank than a city's worth of welfare bums.

They are a societal ill and should be done away with.

That's not why we call him that. I did when he himself said we need to "Spread the wealth around".

So you are saying you take umbrage to an arbitrary set of syllables with no real meaning and on the basis of a sentence fragment decided that Obama is socialist when all of the real socialists keep saying "no he isn't" and then enumerating his non-socialist policy stances?!?!

[BoulderDawg]

The trial continues to go well for Ward. A lastest point is "How was it determined that Ward misrepresented history? No one on the star chamber that made that decision is in any way an expert on indian history/culture/affairs. David Lane managed to bring in true experts that have disputed those claims.

The scuttlebutt gossip is that CU is trying to offer Ward a load of money just to simply go away. If true they are wasting their time. It's not about the money. I'm fairly certain that all Ward wants is his job back, back pay and an apology from the University. In any case Ward is prepared to go all the way. There will be no private settlement.

[SimonM]

Another point on taxation:

We have seen how a government that consistently cut taxes for 8 years handled the economy. We have seen the impact of nearly a decade of tax cuts coupled with gross financial deregulation have had on the economy.

Now regulation is a non-issue. The article I posted earlier today speaks for itself. Canada's top 4 banks (some of the most heavily regulated in the world) posted profits this year.

As for taxation: it really couldn't do any worse for the economy than what the predominant millieu of taxation for the last decade did to actually and try to redistribute some wealth away from the scumbag trust fund oligarchs.

[mawali]

Here's a novel idea people like to pretend about in USA!
USA is the gretaest consumer of drugs so how about taxing the now legal use.
I am sure that will cover alot of new infusion from this wonderful enterprise.

[BoulderDawg]

Here's a novel idea people like to pretend about in USA!
USA is the gretaest consumer of drugs so how about taxing the now legal use.
I am sure that will cover alot of new infusion from this wonderful enterprise.

You know what I think you might have a point here. Of course we can't tax drugs such as cancer drugs or anything involved in good heath. But other drugs.......

To start with Viagra. The tax on that should be 200%. Also the people who eat valium (and other drugs) like candy....they should be taxed 200%.

[Reverend Tap]

For some reason, Comrade Obama doesn't like being called one. Too bad, the shoe fits.

Except that it doesn't. Or have you missed the fact that the socialists and even the hard-line liberals have been complaining about him just as much as the conservatives?

Obama is a left-leaning moderate with ideas on getting the country out of recession that wouldn't be brought up during good economic times. Not a socialist by any means.

To restate what I said in one of the lost posts yesterday, the political dialog in this country has shifted over the past decade or so, as the neoconservative movement, the "gingrich revolution" and all that came to predominance. Genuine conservatives are often now called "moderates" (and moderates are now "liberals," and liberals are now "socialists") due to the ultra-far-right-wing instating itself in the political mainstream by labeling itself as a classically conservative, or even moderately conservative, group, a process which the "liberal media" dutifully picked up on and ran with. Same reason why "liberal" became a politically dirty word and people started calling themselves "progressives" instead.

[BoulderDawg]

Nothing left wing or moderate about Obama. He's a conservative...there is no doubt. As I've said before there are no liberals in Washington maybe with the exception of Kucinich...on a good day.

Liberals have better things to do than to waste time in Washington.

[uki]

more change we can believe in...

-The idea to exclude Russia and China from global decision making is counterproductive. The expert added: “This community of democratic nations is like a new Holy Alliance [a 19th century alliance between Russia, Prussia and Austria meant to provide pan-European security and promote Christian values] and a very anachronistic idea.”

Barack Obama’s administration sees NATO as the nucleus for a global organization of democracies that will eventually replace the United Nations, believes an influential Russian newspaper.

Washington wants NATO to be expanded by inviting counties like Australia, Japan, Brazil and South Africa and become a global organization tackling not only security issues but also epidemics and human rights, reports Kommersant daily on Friday. The next US Ambassador to NATO Ivo H. Daalder is a great supporter of this idea.

Daalder, expert of the Brookings Institution and a foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama during the election campaign, is a strong proponent of the so-called Concert of Democracies.

Exclusive club for democratic nations

full article... http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=12705

[Luk Hop]

This article was linked to Drudge Report this morning:

Senator Barack Obama received a $101,332 bonus from American International Group in the form of political contributions according to Opensecrets.org. The two biggest Congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are - Senators Chris Dodd and Senator Barack Obama.

The A.I.G. Financial Products affiliate of A.I.G. gave out $136,928, the most of any AIG affiliate, in the 2008 cycle. I would note that A.I.G.’s financial products division is the unit that wrote trillions of dollars’ worth of credit-default swaps and "misjudged" the risk.

The Washington Post reports a "mob effect" at A.I.G financial products division:

A tidal wave of public outrage over bonus payments swamped American International Group yesterday. Hired guards stood watch outside the suburban Connecticut offices of AIG Financial Products, the division whose exotic derivatives brought the insurance giant to the brink of collapse last year. Inside, death threats and angry letters flooded e-mail inboxes. Irate callers lit up the phone lines. Senior managers submitted their resignations. Some employees didn't show up at all.

With the anger and rage that is being exhibited against A.I.G., perhaps the bonuses Obama received from A.I.G. explain Obama's A.I.G crocodile tears.

Now that the Wall street Journal has revealed that A.I.G. paid bonuses of $1 million or more to 73 employees, it's time to ask if recipients of A.I.G. "bonuses," including President Obama, will give what now ought to be taxpayer money back?


http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-...Bonus-from-AIG

[1bad65]

I could name plenty that just let their poor starve.

So you can't name even one.

So, by your logic a society that has FORCED food rationing is better than one that does not. Pure insanity.

FYI, a 'select few' in socialist/communist countries are not on FORCED food rationing. Isn't that the very thing that type of government is suposed to prevent?