Obama wins

S

slah

New member
Any decently intelligent politician should have nationwide \"free\" health care and nationwide \"free\" education as a goal for hia campaign - anything else just seems kinda stupid to me. I can´t see any way of reasoning against having a healthy and well-educated population.

Saying that you have to work hard and \"earn\" the right to be healthy just seems very very backwards to me - but then again I´m from Denmark and probably a bit spoiled when it comes to these things....
 
S

ScottRadom

Shogun of Saskatchewan
Originally posted by slah
Any decently intelligent politician should have nationwide \"free\" health care and nationwide \"free\" education as a goal for hia campaign - anything else just seems kinda stupid to me. I can´t see any way of reasoning against having a healthy and well-educated population.

Saying that you have to work hard and \"earn\" the right to be healthy just seems very very backwards to me - but then again I´m from Denmark and probably a bit spoiled when it comes to these things....
Click to expand...

Well I am with you about 50%. In Canada we have \"free\" medicine -meaning of course it get\'s buried in your tax money- and it really has it\'s hiccups.

In the altruistic sense of things you figure it\'s everyones right to be healthy and have medicine and doctors care made available to them regardless of social and economic class. Okay, good stuff. In implementing the free health care the system is so badly abused on a daily basis. People go to the doctor for ANYTHING from mild flu to a minor muscle pull and the system get\'s back logged FAST. People needing real diagnosis and surgeries are finding the waiting lists climb to 6 months to a year for MRI tests etc.

It has worked great up until very recently where locally the crunch is really being hit as the free medicine system cannot attract new health care workers who can get double+ the salary working in a private facility.

I love that we have \"free\" healthcare and don\'t want to run it down, I just want to point out that it\'s very hard to implement on a practical basis.
 
G

generulpoleaxe

New member
Originally posted by slah
Any decently intelligent politician should have nationwide \"free\" health care and nationwide \"free\" education as a goal for hia campaign - anything else just seems kinda stupid to me. I can´t see any way of reasoning against having a healthy and well-educated population.

Saying that you have to work hard and \"earn\" the right to be healthy just seems very very backwards to me - but then again I´m from Denmark and probably a bit spoiled when it comes to these things....
Click to expand...

you obviously haven\'t seen how the benefits culture has developed in the UK then.
many are better off unemployed and recieving benefits as they gets so much for free than actualy work.
one of the reasons so many english people can\'t stand their own country or it\'s socialist politicians.
 
PegaZus

PegaZus

Stealth Freak
Originally posted by slah
Any decently intelligent politician should have nationwide \"free\" health care and nationwide \"free\" education as a goal for hia campaign - anything else just seems kinda stupid to me. I can´t see any way of reasoning against having a healthy and well-educated population.

Saying that you have to work hard and \"earn\" the right to be healthy just seems very very backwards to me - but then again I´m from Denmark and probably a bit spoiled when it comes to these things....
Click to expand...
Fair enough. First, the education. The \"free\" education is referring to university level. Everybody gets a basic education; school from kindergarten to high school for free. Some will debate that they\'re getting the basics now, but we\'ll let that slide for now and assume everybody who completes high school has a basic education.

The issue then becomes should everybody get free university education. I\'m against it. By having a cost, and competing against each other, I feel we get a better educational product for the same dollar amount.

Then the \"free\" health care. Again, the basics are covered. Free clinics currently exist where vaccinations can be given. Walk into an emergency room and they have to treat you, ability to pay or not. And it is abused by some people. Walk in because you\'ve got a headache and need an aspirin. Free would just extend this abuse to a lot more people and degrade the speed and service.

In a perfect world, these policies would work, but I\'ve yet to meet a perfect person.

EDIT: Whoa! Didn\'t mean to triple-pile you there, Slah!
 
M

mattrock

New member
Originally posted by Theomar Pius
As far as I knew, everybody in this country has the opportunity to go to college. If your family couldn\'t afford it, you just worked real hard in high school, got good grades, got a student loan, worked real hard in college, got a degree, got a job, worked real hard, paid off student loan, feel accomplished and lived the rest of your life knowing you earned every single thing you got. It\'s like plastic pre-paints. Yeah, you could use them, but don\'t you feel better painting your own stuff?

Obama is proposing cutting out the \"worked real hard\" part and offering handouts. Same goes for heathcare. If you work real hard, get a good job and prosper, you can get the best heathcare in the world in this country. Equal opportunity is what we have, it\'s up to the individual to decide what to do with it.

That\'s the way this country has been for 230+ years, and all we got for it was the most prosperous nation on earth.
Click to expand...

VERY well said. :beer:

And to those that got a chuckle out of the marxist/socialism comment, you\'ll note that I said he toed that line...not that he jumped right over it and set to running.

As others have pointed out, it\'s not that we ARE socialist, but we certainly seem more determined to head that direction than to foster and work towards the realization of free-market capitalism, which is, in large part, what makes this country what it is, however flawed the system.

As I\'ve said, I hope he does well and that the country prospers under his leadership. But don\'t be so naive as to fail to realize that he was elected because he is a rockstar, not because his policies were more attractive than the alternative.
 
M

mattrock

New member
Originally posted by StarFyre
I think Obama was the best candidate (not much choice really....and Palin being some hardcore christian nutcase, I wouldn\'t want her to be VP, incase McCain died..hehe).
Click to expand...

What exactly made Obama the best candidate? You know that Obama and McCain weren\'t the only parties running, right?

But what is strange, isn\'t Obama the one who said middleclass are people who make 200K/year+?

Hell no, if it was him...200K IS ALOT, even now days...you can easily live on 200K/year as long as you\'re not stupid.

Sanjay
Click to expand...

No, Obama wants to raise taxes on those people as he does NOT consider them to be the middle class. He\'d like to raise taxes on those in that income range and redistribute that wealth such that those in the lower income brackets can benefit from that money. Take from the rich and give to the poor. And he\'ll go further to say that those who already work the first four to five months of every year just to pay their tax bill are selfish for not wanting those taxes to be higher.

Nevermind, of course, that a good number of people who will benefit from this redistribution don\'t pay taxes at all.
 
S

supervike

Super Moderator
Originally posted by mattrock
But don\'t be so naive as to fail to realize that he was elected because he is a rockstar, not because his policies were more attractive than the alternative.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have to disagree here.

I followed this election like no other and really took my time in deciding.

I did NOT vote for his celebrity status, but rather his policies (or promises of policies).

I think that statement minimizes people and basicallly says that they aren\'t smart enough to vote on their own.

EDIT:

But regardless, we should not argue the whole campaign again.

The people HAVE decided.

Obama is our President.
 
E

Evil Dave

New member
Originally posted by supervike
Obama is our President.
Click to expand...

Nope, Bush still is until January, and no one seemed to remember that in all these discussions we\'ve had.
When he gets in, I will treat Obama as the Democrats treated Bush. Not out of Malice. (At first, I\'m sure he\'ll earn it honestly.)
I\'m curious as to how many will call me racist or forget the double standard when it\'s their candidate.
 
M

mud duck

New member
Yes we can not forget about the Greens, the Socialist Workers, the Constitutional, and the Independent parties. Although we heard next to nothing in the main stream press about this candidates and their political philosophies.
As for the Senate here in Minnesota (Coleman Vs Franklin), heck I didn\'t hear anything (ie radio commercials) from the Independent candidate tell the day before the elections and really the only thing that I did hear from the \"main stream\" candidates where attack ads about the other. I swear it sounded like a couple of 2nd graders on the playground calling each other a poopy head and fighting over who got the bigger glass of juice at snack time:|~:|~:|~:cussing:
 
S

supervike

Super Moderator
Except for Mark Sommerfelt.

He was the President of our 6th grade class.

I beat that little bastard down, but I\'m relatively sure he stole my Fran Tarkenton football card.

lollol
 
B

Bill

New member
Originally posted by Avelorn
Marxist?? Hilarous. lol Move to Sweden and you\'ll realise that Obama is little to the right of the rightwingers here. Not value conservatives mind you, but in social policy.
Click to expand...
And people wonder why you guys (and other Scandinavian countries) have one of the highest qualities of life in the world :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Dragonsreach
It shouldn\'t have been..............but the Media (especially in the UK) were touting his Skin Colour as a criteria of importance.
Media driven hysteria has fueled far to many easily led opinions, I have no doubt that American media will have used (however Subtly) the \"Colour issue\" as a concience pricker to some people.
Skin colour means nothing, it\'s the person that\'s important.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely; but his race is still an important issue, simply because he is the first black man to be President. Simple as. It\'s a remarkable milestone when you consider what was going on at the time of his birth.
 
D

darthfoley

New member
So, when do we get the first black PM in the UK?

Obama\'s skin color is the *least* important thing about him, IMO.
 
P

Phoenix Rising316

New member
I think it\'s good that this country can overcome descrimination and elect a black president.

The problem that I have is what he represents. I think that the only thing that Obama will bring to America is infanticide and his Socialist-Liberal agenda.

Granted we as Americans didn\'t have much to choose from this election, but is Obama the best choose, I think not.

Buckle-Up America because it\'s going to be a bumpy road!!!!:cry:
 
alextheartist

alextheartist

New member
Originally posted by darthfoley
So, when do we get the first black PM in the UK?

Obama\'s skin color is the *least* important thing about him, IMO.
Click to expand...

Same time as America has a woman president lol

Alex
 
G

generulpoleaxe

New member
Originally posted by alextheartist
Originally posted by darthfoley
So, when do we get the first black PM in the UK?

Obama\'s skin color is the *least* important thing about him, IMO.
Click to expand...

Same time as America has a woman president lol

Alex
Click to expand...

we do have a poridge wog in charge, it\'s almost the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back To Top
Top