Forums → WEPR → US Elections 2010

I'm not saying they wont be, I'm saying that even if they aren't the cause the economy is likely to recover and they are likely to take credit for it.

Quite happy on how things turned out with the Republicans winning. I loved Obamas speech too, because he KNOWS hes in a tight spot.

Yay America has a Republican house and a Democratic senate! Oh the work that'll get done...

But sarcasm aside I have a bit of a rant:

What is it about America and this idea of conservatism? It's an oxymoron when you look back on American history. A country founded on revolution and rejecting the way things were, a country of inovation during both world wars, a power house in science and technology. Yet, it seems since post Vietnam American has gone the route of internal isolationism. They accept the idea of expanding scientifically, yet socially they remain a stagnant pool. You'll notice the long term effects are starting to come into play, a floundering economy, a poor health and education system, a rift between rich and poor. Others may say what they like, but when your culture stagnates so does everything else.

It would seem to me that the last 2 years have been nothing but the Republican party filabustering everything that the President tried to pass, pointing fingers at him about the state of things and generally making him as miserable as possible.

Its no secret that most of the Republican campaign ads I saw were either bashing their opponent as an "Obama Supporter" or promising that, if elected, they would immediately strive to undo every scant piece of legislation that the President was able to pass. This year seemed, at least to me, to be the most openly aggresive set of ads Iv'e seen since coming to this country in 1993. In addition, I actually saw ads from Republican "support groups" telling hispanic and black voters not to vote at all!

It's absolutely a disgrace that such a powerful country could have so many problems due to political infighting. Nothing seems to be getting done in a real sense to help anyone!

I don't consider myself a staunch Republican or Democrat. I hear an issue and try to look at both sides before coming to my own conclusions. However, I believe strongly that if this government continues to fight over rubbish issues like whether the President is even American and whether or not he should be impeached for tyranny or whatever the such, this country will continue to simply suffer.

True change MUST take place. If the Democratic ideas were completely communist and would rob this country of freedom, then fine. The Republicans should convince this country that its plans won't send us back to the way things were in 2008, with the rich and poor separated by light-years and greedy businessmen sending the entire world into a recession.

It would seem to me that the last 2 years have been nothing but the Republican party filabustering everything that the President tried to pass, pointing fingers at him about the state of things and generally making him as miserable as possible.

The Republicans should convince this country that its plans won't send us back to the way things were in 2008, with the rich and poor separated by light-years and greedy businessmen sending the entire world into a recession.

The Republicans should convince this country that its plans won't send us back to the way things were in 2008, with the rich and poor separated by light-years and greedy businessmen sending the entire world into a recession.

greedy businessmen sending the entire world into a recession.

HAHA! Republicans PAWN Democrats!! Pretty good election.

I don't think that business/businessmen are greedy ceteris paribus per se. Its just how the system (since hundreds of years) works.

When the persons ceased being nomads and became settlers they started producing goods. They formed the cornerstone of society, the "family" or if you prefer the Oikos.
At the beginning the Oikos was self-sufficient. For example lets say they had an orange tree, the orange tree produces two oranges per day, ergo what they had to eat were two oranges.
Lets suppose now that for whatever reason they needed only one orange. What are they going to do with the surplus orange?
a) They can just throw it away.
B) They can store it, for later use (Invest it)
c) They know that their neighbor has a surplus of flour, so they go to the neighbor's house and they exchange their orange with the excess flour.
The problem with this is that very rarely the person A has something that B needs and vice versa.

I will skip a few steps. Now there is a functioning economy, there is a market, laws, money etc.
Assuming that an orange is worth 2 money units.
The exchange is pretty simple O -->2 M

Now the opposite, the producer has money (2 units) but not an orange tree.
He has to buy the tree, so we have:
M ---> T--->O
Or more simply:
M--->O
He sells the oranges, hence the new scheme is:
M1--->O--->M2

The relation between M1 and M2 has to be: M1>M2
If M1<M2 the person doesn't earn money, therefore he hasn't money to spend for his needs, ergo the system is not workng, its a total failure.

The main cause of greed is the M1>M2, if somebody finds a way to circumvent the M1>M2, "greed" is going to be limited in a great extent.

The gap between rich and poor, in itself, means absolutely nothing.

Presidents bailing out irresponsible companies you mean? What does that have to do with greedy businessmen?

"But UHC is so gooood!"

So please, don't talk about "greedy" businessmen. When a rich businessman fails and goes into debt, another company takes his place.

Also, something I really never understood: why Americans elect their president and representatives separately. I mean... a Democratic president with a house (?) full of Republicans would (usually) fail.

If the economy does improve, maybe the republicans will be the cause. You can't really determine such a thing until you actually see the improvements.

What matters is how much everything costs

When it comes time everyone is paying for NHC, you will no longer have a choice in which health plan you have. Maybe I would rather use a HSA to cover my medical bills? But no, greedy Obama wants the government to have a monopoly over our insurance. See, no more choices at the flick of a pen.

What if, for one reason or another, it isn't?

We'll be stuck with UHC

I beg to differ.

I beg to differ. In this link http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ⦠-spending/ a Canadian man complains that it took him 3 months to get a hip replacement. let me repeat for emphasis. 3 months. I don't know about you, but if I ever needed a hip replacement, I would not want to wait 3 months to get it.

I beg to differ. In this link http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ⦠-spending/ a Canadian man complains that it took him 3 months to get a hip replacement. Let me repeat for emphasis. 3 months. I don't know about you, but if I ever needed a hip replacement, I would not want to wait 3 months to get it

Regular health insurance doesn't work because the only way they CAN make a profit is by covering people who do not have pre existing conditions.

The only difference between NHC and current health insurance systems is that people withe pre existing conditions are covered... and everyone has to pay.

Right now, nobody wants to see an increase in taxes. The cost of living is already high enough. Why would I want NHC? I do not fear change in general, just change that will screw up my life.

Personally, I would like to see more people give HSAs a shot. You need to be responsible if you're going to have one, but we can't always be there to help those who are irresponsible.

Right, because governments never change policy '>.>

First off, remember that Wolf is actually Canadian meaning that he has a better look at the system then we do.

Secondly the problem could be fixed by investing more in hospitals and medical schools, yes it's more money but remember how low our income tax rates are in the first place and you should't be too upset.