More Socialism???/
Find a Conversation
More Socialism???/
| Thu, 11-06-2008 - 11:50am |
I usually don't agree with the National Review - but this seems to be a
| Thu, 11-06-2008 - 11:50am |
I usually don't agree with the National Review - but this seems to be a
Pages
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
I heard that retirees get full heath benefits without having to pay a dime. If true, that's got to be killing them financially. They made these deals when gas prices were low, and they could sell a lot of the big cars and SUV's that people demand.
Now what? They are going to build a bunch of low profit egg beaters and try to sell them to people that want SUV's?
I do think an investment short term is ok, but once on their feet again, I would prefer the government to sell off its investment, albeit slowly so as to not disrupt markets.
I'll also reiterate that I've changed my view on banking, in that long term it might be wise to have a wholly owned government bank in the marketplace, along with our usual repertoire of commercial banks, this so they can set the pace of sorts for the financial industry. At least we know they would be lending now.
Full length fiction: http://llhaesa.org/ (pronounced la.hay.ess.sa)
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
They made these deals when gas prices were low, and they could sell a lot of the big cars and SUV's that people demand.
First of all, if that's true, that was incredibly short-sighted and irresponsible.
As far as the US car companies are concerned, they
Now unions are a problem. We cannot have workers banding together for fair treatment, now can we?
I am in a union, and will flat out say it does some rather inane things at times, things I do not agree with. Overall it serves good purpose.
The autoworkers union surely has its own issues, and perhaps it occasionally loses its way in representation of the membership. Overall, it serves good purpose.
You will likely not agree on any sort of universal health care proposal, probably deeming it the work of those closeted socialists, yet GM until a year or two ago was saddled with health care cost to the tune of $1300 for each unit sold.
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
You then just transfer the liability from corporations to government. They aren't having good luck with it in Hawaii.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/10/17/hawaii.health.ap/
Of course not, because the entire system has to be changed nationwide...
now I don't know how you view America, but there are some very intelligent people living here.
People go nuts screaming about government run health care, failing to realise the biggest insurance programme in the world is run by the government (social security.) Not my point though...
there are hundreds of possible ways of setting up a health care system, it need not be as now, and it need not be government provided.
Are you saying we aren't intelligent enough to figure this out? That we must accept what is, because we are incapable of forming a better system?
There is a lot of inherent waste in the system, and the money flows to places in excess, where it need not go in such amounts.
Instead of tossing your hands up and saying
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
Pages