6th November 2008, 8:32 AM
lazy, she lacks information on the basic history of our country, on the basic makeup of the world OUTSIDE our country, and the basic FUNCTION of our country.
She didn't just mispronounce nuclear here, she's been saying one thing after another that's plain factually wrong, demonstrably so.
And yes, latching onto "spread the wealth" is kinda silly considering that ever since our country has had taxes, that's what we do anyway. Our nation runs on functions that could be considered socialist, the question is to what degree we have it. No one's in favor of a full blown socialist regime where people forcibly take everything you own and distribute it that way. Universal health care has become a pretty important thing to me, so yeah, I certainly hope that he votes "liberal" this time around. Most of my family can't afford to see doctors. One of them has thrown her back out to the point where she can't even work. How is she supposed to work harder to earn that doctor visit if her body won't cooperate?
I'm no fan of communism, it's an easily corrupted "solution" that ends up hurting the majority of people. Before anyone says "China", the reason they are doing so well is because the chinese government actually backed off the communist control angle enough to let their market flourish. However, TOTAL let it alone economics results in problems like the one we are in. It's a balancing act.
Personally, I think the best economic system is post-scarcity, where techonology reaches the point where we don't need workers to do manual labor and it's all automated, in which case no one owns the means of production except our metal overlords. Everything we do now is merely baby steps towards that glistening crystaline future. In that scenario, people are free to run their businesses as they see fit, but money will be meaningless, and companies will basically be run just like freeware outfits, where people just make things for the joy of doing it. See: the internet for a small preview of what post-scarcity looks like.
She didn't just mispronounce nuclear here, she's been saying one thing after another that's plain factually wrong, demonstrably so.
And yes, latching onto "spread the wealth" is kinda silly considering that ever since our country has had taxes, that's what we do anyway. Our nation runs on functions that could be considered socialist, the question is to what degree we have it. No one's in favor of a full blown socialist regime where people forcibly take everything you own and distribute it that way. Universal health care has become a pretty important thing to me, so yeah, I certainly hope that he votes "liberal" this time around. Most of my family can't afford to see doctors. One of them has thrown her back out to the point where she can't even work. How is she supposed to work harder to earn that doctor visit if her body won't cooperate?
I'm no fan of communism, it's an easily corrupted "solution" that ends up hurting the majority of people. Before anyone says "China", the reason they are doing so well is because the chinese government actually backed off the communist control angle enough to let their market flourish. However, TOTAL let it alone economics results in problems like the one we are in. It's a balancing act.
Personally, I think the best economic system is post-scarcity, where techonology reaches the point where we don't need workers to do manual labor and it's all automated, in which case no one owns the means of production except our metal overlords. Everything we do now is merely baby steps towards that glistening crystaline future. In that scenario, people are free to run their businesses as they see fit, but money will be meaningless, and companies will basically be run just like freeware outfits, where people just make things for the joy of doing it. See: the internet for a small preview of what post-scarcity looks like.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)