Comments
[Sign Guestbook]
545 Entries
Comments: Here is one of our Followers' chosen I like this one too she sued the opposition for mirroring her primary election website...I guess she didn't want the things she stood for to be released to the general public.
Comments: Yeesh. I'm glad we don't have that problem in Australia. I think that if these psychos become an imminent threat, I don't think it would be impossible to get them to wipe themselves out - they aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed, and I think that Dr Bob's hypotheses could be utilised here. If they don't, at least make them paranoid about being turned against each other. They'd hate to learn that they are killing their own on Darwin's behalf! I note the comments Miguel, looks like the yankee nerds have control over the internet. I wouldn't be too worried considering the US Army was one of the first organisations to embrace multiculturalism. Hopefully is is a lot of smoke and not much else - this is my suspicion. We have very strict gun control in Australia - we like it this way.
Comments: Radguy... I wish that were the worst of our problems
Comments: Our election featured a disturbing outcome. The social dominators here (represented by the liberals who are far from real liberals) I believe created a lot of bad press about our former PM Kevin Rudd. The ALP were sucked in by this, particularly the ambitious (possibly also SDs) ones who turned his party against him. The right wing social dominators did this because he was our most popular PM in a long time, and they were sure to lose against him. Rudd is a Queenslander, and Queenslanders value loyalty which is why I believe that as a state, they shifted to the right. Rudd is the only PM to have been deposed whilst serving in his first term. Rudd has also been described as an SD, although I don't believe this - I think he is a good bloke who was castrated by marginal seat factors - ie: the authoritarian follower policies. These issues were the mining tax and "boat people" which hurt the ALP in outer suburban Sydney and devastated them in WA. The national broadband network probably won the election for the ALP. Dominators tried to tell us that wireless is great and fibre will be superseded. You can imagine how this topic went down on the net! Luckily for us, we had many awesome independents elected including a former intelligence officer who was screwed by the Howard government (libs) for his whistle-blowing over WMD in Iraq. These indies have awesome BS detectors and over the course of 3 weeks, they all with the exception of two (Katter and Crook) chose to support the Gillard government. We ended up with a hung parliament (well hung I would say), and we are experiencing a "new paradigm" in politics as it is often referred to. I believe that this is because of ferocious public political blogs that meticulously dismantle the disinformation provided by our biased media. I hope that you guys don't have to fight as hard as we did. However, hunting the Dougs of the world is fast becoming a popular sport in Australia. Do you guys have the upper hand on the net? We sure do!
Comments: Radguy: We have a phrase here "Get Off My Lawn!". Usually yelled by old men at kids, and indicative of an ossified brain and bitterness. That's how I view what will become of the US if the Authoritarians have their way.
Comments: Hmm. Over 1 million melancholy workers in the USA - people not looking for work because they don't expect to be able to find a job. They are not counted in your unemployment numbers. Yep, your extreme capitalists are going to do EVERYTHING in their power to convince authoritarian followers that Obama has not done a good job - : ie: they will continue to reduce employment and blame Obama. What other moves can they play? They certainly can't win by inspiring people, so they play the only card they have - the FEAR CARD. Well if Obama loses in two years, the USA can kiss goodbye to the positive diplomatic steps he and his team have made for your country internationally. If so, your country will be considered a hermit by the rest of the world, and be punished accordingly. The rest of the world will realise how easily Americans are intimidated. Voting in the republicans will demonstrate American WEAKNESS, and in will come the international dominators to capitalise on the enslaved American population. I note that this is your wish Doug. Not very patriotic of you. Obama is a worldly and good man, All Americans should be proud of him and realise that he is your only hope for continuing prosperity.
Comments: I humbly apologise Miguel, I got yours and Dougy's posts mixed up! Forgive me!
Comments: "I put up a red flag when the government buys car companies or bails out their favored banks because this is not capitalism. I own GM, really, does this mean I can shut down the Holden factory?" Miguel - why should workers be punished because of the actions of a few greedy capitalists? I do not like the way that favorites were played, but how could you evaluate who is more deserving in such a short amount of time? I might remind you Miguel, the GOP took away many banking regulations. It is CHEAP of any republican to have a go at how the democrats dealt with the problem, considering REPUBLICANS CAUSED THE GFC to pay for a failed attempt at global dominance. Holden actually makes money, it would be silly to sell a profitable asset. Holden has survived and is doing well despite strong competition from Asia. Oh, by the way - the rest of the world thinks that American cars are UGLY - even Holden designers. If you guys want to export your cars with any degree of success, your country needs to become more WORLDLY and better educated. FFS, why is an aussie here having to tell ya's what's what? 300,000,000 yanks, 21,000,000 aussies? Ya'll should be kickin' my arse! Where are the rest of you? Too stupid or ignorant to post? Apathetic? Dominated? Enslaved? Maybe Pepsi high is not educating your kids to be confident free thinkers. It's a good thing you have universities for remedial learning - but a pity more can't attend them.
Comments: Miguel. 8765309 Gini I got your number. Yes. But realize that being rich or poor means greatly different things in different countries and at different times. Concur...but is it acceptable to create a society in which mobility is stifled? Yep. Go ahead and confiscate the entire wealth from the uber-rich. You have enough to cover the deficit for 2010. Whatchagonnado for 2011? Take a million each from 1.3 million millionaires? You will quickly understand that its the spending which is out of alignment to receipts. My comment was regarding the ACCOUNTABILITY not confiscation. The healthcare legislation as passed uncouples this "tax" from the government to the citizens. We should rightly consider this a tax and add this expense -in effect increasing government by 40%. "the government?" I put up a red flag when the government buys car companies or bails out their favored banks because this is not capitalism. I own GM, really, does this mean I can shut down the Holden factory? Unfortunate but necessary...ownership was taken as collateral for loans, you seem to be talking about TARP...signed by GWB...even so the treasury is busy divesting themselves. Did you just call the Lama a bigot? Nope...I only met him once. But Tibet was a religious feudal mess. The PRC hasn'tmade it better, but it was a mess before them as well.
Comments: "The US taxes my income and redistributes this for necessary expenses" Statism is another way of describing a socialist idea, ie: capitalists can't be given free reign because they have proven to be apathetic to any one else's causes. I'll accept that as answer C Doug. See - I don't think my question was malformed, and you ended up answering it. "The term statism is sometimes used to refer to state capitalism or highly-regulated market economies with large amounts of government intervention. It is also used to refer to state socialism or co-operative economic systems that use the state, through nationalization, as a means of running industry." Given that health care is not a profitable exercise usually, I see this concept falling into the latter part of the definition. Do you disagree? Statism is the dog collar around your neck Doug - I hope it doesn't chafe too much.
Comments: Miguel. 8765309 Gini I got your number. Yes. But realize that being rich or poor means greatly different things in different countries and at different times. Yep. Go ahead and confiscate the entire wealth from the uber-rich. You have enough to cover the deficit for 2010. Whatchagonnado for 2011? Take a million each from 1.3 million millionaires? You will quickly understand that its the spending which is out of alignment to receipts. The healthcare legislation as passed uncouples this "tax" from the government to the citizens. We should rightly consider this a tax and add this expense -in effect increasing government by 40%. I put up a red flag when the government buys car companies or bails out their favored banks because this is not capitalism. I own GM, really, does this mean I can shut down the Holden factory? Did you just call the Lama a bigot?
Comments: Doug... I can't help but laugh at this... "The cost is enormous. Many of these infants cost half a million dollars to save. In my black and white world there is no equation for life. We watch the "compassionate" countries use actuaries to account for their shades of grey. But hey your healthcare costs are lower." So...it's fine if the insurance companies employ actuaries...an entity whose sole purpose is to make money...but NOT if a government does it?
Comments: Radguy. It's not easy responding to malformed questions. When you my views of government provided healthcare funding. You need to first understand that our government does not provide "funding". Capitalist countries do not produce items for sale, therefore they do not create funds for most purposes. The US taxes my income and redistributes this for necessary expenses. In this case the source of the funds is the taxpayer not the government. When I described the revenue sources of the US's enacted reform as statist I guess your understanding of this concept is over your pay grade. Did you want me to reply to a universal system which owns all the means to deliver healthcare? A single payer system? A government mandate to buy insurance? Try to formulate a real question.
Comments: Doug you coward - A, B or C Buddy. That is a question from my earlier post. You aint' shy, although you refuse to answer this question. WUS! You are completely unworthy of respect - pathetic just like your party. Did you know that my party is international? See if your turdy party could have as many supporters in as many countries. You're fearful of us green humanists. We're comin' to getcha! We are gonna make your kids gay, pro-choice and PAGAN! Muhuhuhahah!!!! "It should be a simple thing, to find a successful socialist state. Can we find one that didn't need to turn to capitalism to propel itself from the 18th century into the 21st?" From my point earlier, this point that you say could have the capitalist and socialist words reversed and be an equally stupid point. Your definition of capitalism is everything aside from state ownership. And you try to claim Sweden. Thickhead. I restate the question: How would you describe socialist ideas if socialism is such a dirty word for you? For example - government provided health funding is A: a capitalist idea, B: a socialist idea, or C: an acceptable substitute word for B? As far as I am concerned CHECKMATE! Grow a brain. You are a loser from a loser party. I'll keep spraying you until you remove your head from your anus. Our Medicare system works very well thank you very much. No capitalists required. Well libertarian, don't expect your fellow libertarians to help you out when you get sick. You might get lucky and be helped by humanists.
Comments: Doug... There are no successful states that wholly subscribe to ANY particular economic model, they are all flawed, to some extent or other. I don't like the healthcare reform either...we should have left the public option in, or moved everyone to medicare. As it is, it's just another way for big$$$ to extract money from the economy, which is it's ONLY purpose after all.
|
| < Previous 15 | Next 15 > |
Back to The Authoritarians