i just thought about something fundamentally wrong with business in capitalistic sys

[EBSB52]

It's always difficult when you were raised to believe a bunch of bull. People just have too much invested in their beliefs. It's who they are.

Yea, they call that being an ideologue; America is full of them.

[mathdotcom]

You want supporting evidence?

Open your eyes and look the phuck around. Show me the countries with the most poor people, and you'll also be showing me the people with the most government.

I'm looking for your 'supporting data'. Why do you think Canada is doing better than the U.S.? You claim to advocate socialism, but obviously aren't even aware of its definition:

An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.

Sorry to break it to you, but neither Canada/New Zealand/W.European countries (all of which you cited) are socialist by this definition.

Now get the phuck out of here and spew your "neo-retard" rhetoric elsewhere.

I was gonna make a joke asking why you aren't in bed early to be ready for your 6am shift at McDonald's, but then I realized you're obviously unemployed because you're useless and happen to live in a society where that isn't valued.

[reno cool]

I think the countries that do the worst are those that have been exploited and robbed by capitalist corporate interest. ----Latin America is the biggest example.(except those that are trying to shed the yoke like Venezuela) Those being bombed-- Iraq, Afghanistan not doing too good either. Africa indebted to foreign banks not too great either.
In fact much of the worlds poverty is owed to capitalism and the banking system.

[dwaechte]

>>>>>>>>>>>So EBSB... jaded extremist much? lol.


Deluded by neo-con rhetoric much?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>.This thread was pretty entertaining. Unfortunately, I doubt anyone here is going to be convinced of anything.


No they/I won't, I just like exposing neo-cons and watch them avoid my questions/points and run off. Notice no one is challenging me to answer a question? I have done so many times with no response. Notice none of them want to talk debt or any of the many issues raised by the 20/28 years of the mess they created?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.The world will always be gray, though I guess there's nothing wrong with fighting for your personal shade.


Sure, but some support their position with data/evidence, others just refer to what their diddy told em.

Ugh.

There's nothing wrong with having your beliefs, but when you get to the point as you have where you think you're not even being challenged and that your views are God's gift to political philosophy and economic ideals, you don't come across well. On most of the issues you've talked about, there are may sides that have merit, not just yours.

Anyways, I'm done. Mellow out dude, it's been my experience that being angry and jaded doesn't do much for one's happiness, especially when that anger is directed towards something you choose not to even attempt to control. If it does bring you happiness, it's probably caused by being a lazy fukc.

[mathdotcom]

I think the countries that do the worst are those that have been exploited and robbed by capitalist corporate interest. ----Latin America is the biggest example.(except those that are trying to shed the yoke like Venezuela) Those being bombed-- Iraq, Afghanistan not doing too good either. Africa indebted to foreign banks not too great either.
In fact much of the worlds poverty is owed to capitalism and the banking system.

And all the ones not being bombed? North Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia? African debt is a symptom, not a cause. The cause is dictatorship and corruption.

[pico]

Do all of you agree with me that multi-national corporations are colonizing poor countries using economic and political manipulation through IMF, World Bank, US Military, CIA etc.?

Africa is not poor because they're bunch of lazy black people. They're poor because they were ****ed over by europeans (french, english, dutch, spanish, portugese etc). Now they're getting ****ed by corporations like Weapons Manufacturer, Diamond Mining Companies etc. It is so funny, i remember reading the book talking about why africa is so poor. the book was written by a Nobel Prize Laureat in Economics...forgot the name. They listed corrupt gov, bad credit system etc. But the real reason is they were ****ed over by the white folks. And now they're getting raped by the corporations.

These economists come up with bullshit models predicting 1000% return on some power plant project in some indonesia town. they paid off the local officals and hire slave labor. of course the money is either funded by the IMF or the World Bank. the project become a white elephant, then the country end up with an expensive loan and now have to serve corporate interest.

Is there anything wrong with that? Yes, but that is the real world.

[reno cool]

Think you summed it up well pico.

[EBSB52]

You want supporting evidence?

Open your eyes and look the phuck around. Show me the countries with the most poor people, and you'll also be showing me the people with the most government.

I'm looking for your 'supporting data'. Why do you think Canada is doing better than the U.S.? You claim to advocate socialism, but obviously aren't even aware of its definition:

An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.

Sorry to break it to you, but neither Canada/New Zealand/W.European countries (all of which you cited) are socialist by this definition.

Now get the phuck out of here and spew your "neo-retard" rhetoric elsewhere.

I was gonna make a joke asking why you aren't in bed early to be ready for your 6am shift at McDonald's, but then I realized you're obviously unemployed because you're useless and happen to live in a society where that isn't valued.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You want supporting evidence?

Open your eyes and look the phuck around.


I was hoping for something a little more scientific. Perhaps data or some sort of objective research.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Show me the countries with the most poor people, and you'll also be showing me the people with the most government.


When you say, "most," what you mean is with the highest rate. It would be scientifically invalid to compare as a matter of gross numbers, China and the US, India and the US. BTW, I'll give you China and India, let's focus on industrialized countries like Canada, W. Europe, etc... Furthermore, that would be a distant inference rather than a study of fiscal ideologies. You need to draw a theory and support it rather than just say, hey, we have a better life than them, we must be better. Paris Hilton could say that of any of us in here and it would be devoid of anything of any value. So please make a cogent argument using some supporting data, even if it's simplistic. That kind of argumentation makes me a better arguer.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm looking for your 'supporting data'. Why do you think Canada is doing better than the U.S.?


I've only posted it at least a dozen times, so here's one more for you to ignore due to lack of any good counter.

First of all, our arguments have been over which US party is more effective to which fiscal ideology is better for the people. This reference supports both really, as it shows how the Dems, who are more socialist, actually improve the fiscal state of the US, rendering me to believe that not only are the Dems fiscally better for the country, but that a more socialistic approach is also better for the people.

http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

I've already posted this, I will cite it again if you wish, but the US Dollar as compared to Cananda was 1 USD = 1.28 CAD in Jan 93, 1 USD = 1.55 CAd in Jan 01 and is today 1 USD = 1.23 CAD http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi Hopever, that last number is deceptive, as 2 months ago and for the 2 years or more preceeding that the USD and CAD were even. The reason the USD is appreciating over the last 2 month or so is that the market is tanking, so people pull their cash and put it in bonds, artificially throwing the dollar up in value.

As for the cause of this indebtedness: Too much military spending. We match the world dollar for dollar and that doesn;t include Bush's semi-annual 120B gifts to Halliburton.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You claim to advocate socialism, but obviously aren't even aware of its definition:

[SIZE=-1]An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Sure I know what it is, have forever. Some definitions refer to socialism as the people controlling the means of production, others call it collectivism. The differnce between socialism and communism is that communism has the government benefit from this collectivism. Labor unions are strong in W. Europe, just as I believe it was you saying France passed laws making it difficult to fire people, ever. Well, in communist countries you won't find labor unions, that's the difference with each type of collectivism. Socialist countries collect and redistribute equally, communist countries collect and provide for governmental elites.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sorry to break it to you, but neither Canada/New Zealand/W.European countries (all of which you cited) are socialist by this definition.


Sure they are, what else do you call socialized medicine / universal care? It's socialism. It's collectivism and distribution to all, that way all have socialized meds. What else would you call it? And that's just one of the elements of those countries in regard to collective socialsim.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.Now get the phuck out of here and spew your "neo-retard" rhetoric elsewhere.


I think you're the neo-contard here, I'm the progressive. What a dick-wipe, you post 1 defintion of 1 word and think you have done something. Posters around the world are thinking, what an asshole, yea, the socialist country I live in really isn't socialist at all, even though we call ourselves that and have all my life. Hysterically funny, Canada isn't quasi-socialist....news to me.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.I was gonna make a joke asking why you aren't in bed early to be ready for your 6am shift at McDonald's, but then I realized you're obviously unemployed because you're useless and happen to live in a society where that isn't valued.

Hey, sanitation engineer, I'm an FAA licensed aircraft mech (A&P), inspector (IA), FCC GROL, private pilot, skydive tandem instr, have a BS degree in Justice and am working on RN, have prereqs done. DO I make a lot of money? No, but quite obviously far more educated than you, now go feed the hogs, your services are needed.

[EBSB52]

I think the countries that do the worst are those that have been exploited and robbed by capitalist corporate interest. ----Latin America is the biggest example.(except those that are trying to shed the yoke like Venezuela) Those being bombed-- Iraq, Afghanistan not doing too good either. Africa indebted to foreign banks not too great either.
In fact much of the worlds poverty is owed to capitalism and the banking system.

Hey, did ya hear, Canada isn't socialist or even quasi-socialist.

[EBSB52]

And all the ones not being bombed? North Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia? African debt is a symptom, not a cause. The cause is dictatorship and corruption.

This will get you better acquainted with Canadian Socialism:

By a wide margin however, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), a democratic socialist political party from the Prairies with its origins in the Christian Left and the social gospel, became the most influential socialist party in Canada.

The CCF gained support in the Canadian Prairies as well as from many Labour Unions. Led by Tommy Douglas, the CCF was elected to power during the 1944 Saskatchewan election. Douglas governed Saskatchewan until 1961. Today his party remain an important force in the politics of the province.

The CCF and the early democratic socialist movement is seen, by some political scientists (such as Gad Horowitz), as mainly a Christian and European Canadian movement.

In 1961, the CCF joined with the Canadian Labour Congress to form the New Democratic Party (NDP). The NDP is more moderate and social democratic than its predecessor, the CCF. The Regina Manifesto of the CCF called for abolishing capitalism, while the NDP merely wants to reform capitalism. They are generally perceived as being responsible for the creation of Universal Health Care, pensions, a human rights code and for the development of Canada's social safety net in general. In the past the NDP has formed provincial governments in British Columbia, Yukon Territory, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario. At present Manitoba has a New Democratic government, while the NDP is the second largest party in Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Nova Scotia. At the federal level the NDP has held strong influence over various minority governments, in particular a Liberal minority led by Pierre Trudeau from 1972-1974. During this period the NDP was successful in forcing the government to create a state-owned oil company, called Petro Canada.

The NDP has held lesser influence over other Liberal-led minority governments during the Lester B. Pearson government (1963-1968) and the Paul Martin government (2004-2006). Their self stated goal is to one day form a federal government on their own and introduce social democratic policies.

In the province of Quebec the NDP has been considerably less popular, but recently has elected a Member of Parliament named Thomas Mulcair from the traditionally Liberal riding of Outremont.

For most of the late 20th century the strongest social democratic party in Quebec has been the sovereigntist Parti Québécois. During the government of Premier René Lévesque the PQ governed with a fairly leftwing agenda; however, in the last two decades the "Péquistes" have moved considerably to the centre of the political spectrum and are considered by many on the Left to be neo-liberal. However like the NDP, the Parti Québécois officially considers itself to be "social democratic".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_social_democracy_in_Canada

[dwaechte]

Calling Canada socialist is a pretty big stretch. Sure, some policies remain from Douglas' days, but the NDP haven't sniffed power in 40 years. Plus, there's that nice little tidbit of us voting Conservative two consecutive elections.

Is Canada more socialist than America? Sure. But on the vast majority of issues, it's socialist movement pressure has virtually no effect on policy.

[reno cool]

I will say that the words Socialism, Communism, dictatorship, democracy have been battered around so much its hard to know what anybody means by them anymore.

In fact the USSR never considered itself a communist country. Communism was considered an ideal which would actually entail no government at all.

I'd consider countries like Canada capitalist. However some capitalist countries have discovered the need to address rudimentary concerns of their citizens.

[dwaechte]

I will say that the words Socialism, Communism, dictatorship, democracy have been battered around so much its hard to know what anybody means by them anymore.

In fact the USSR never considered itself a communist country. Communism was considered an ideal which would actually entail no government at all.

I'd consider countries like Canada capitalist. However some capitalist countries have discovered the need to address rudimentary concerns of their citizens.

Well put. I laugh whenever someone throws out the word "Marxism". 99% of the time they don't even have a full grasp on more than 10% of Marxist concepts. True Marxism compiles so much shit it would take 20 years of full-time study to truly even get past the surface.

All of these words have so many complexities that it's ridiculous for people to assert they have a blatant out and out stance on a particular issue.

[pico]

Come to think of it, republicans has a point. you need a big military so people won't **** with you, and you can go **** with countries with no military. big military = bigger oversea economic interest = more profit at home. In this world, no one really takes you seriously unless you have a nuke. Kim Joon Lil might not be as crazy as you all think

[mathdotcom]

I'm Canadian, you moron.

The NDP is a fringe party that rarely gets more than 10-15% of the seats in our parliament. Apparently that makes Canada a socialist country? What a joke.

What's even funnier though is that you judge progress of different countries by comparing their exchange rate. Apparently, then, the UK has always had a better economy than America.

Again, socialism is defined in any reputable dictionary as:

An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.

Just because medicine is socialized [and even then partially privatized - you can go and buy all the medication you want, just can't pay a doctor for services] doesn't mean the basic means of production are primarily owned by government.

By the way, since Canada is so wonderful, you are always welcome to move here. We have very lax immigration standards.

As for my comment about looking for the 'most poor people', it is obviously meant in per capita terms.

Lucky for you you haven't been to a Canadian hospital where our wonderful universal coverage system forces me to wait 10 hours to get a broken finger fixed. I am not exaggerating.

Also enjoyed your comment about you being better educated than I am. You must be less than 2 years away from a PhD, then. Congrats.

[mathdotcom]

Most people do not work for the government in Canada. Most assets are owned privately. Canadians choose where they want to work, they work for money and pay for things with it. There is no debate over whether Canada has a capitalist system.

If you found out you were 1/64th black, and I asked you whether you were white or black, what would you answer?

[reno cool]

Come to think of it, republicans has a point. you need a big military so people won't **** with you, and you can go **** with countries with no military. big military = bigger oversea economic interest = more profit at home. In this world, no one really takes you seriously unless you have a nuke. Kim Joon Lil might not be as crazy as you all think

again your right on. The US media likes to make out foreign leaders to be kooks. The truth is most of them are pretty rational or pragmatic. In fact Bush is about as kooky as it gets.

[EBSB52]

Calling Canada socialist is a pretty big stretch. Sure, some policies remain from Douglas' days, but the NDP haven't sniffed power in 40 years. Plus, there's that nice little tidbit of us voting Conservative two consecutive elections.

Is Canada more socialist than America? Sure. But on the vast majority of issues, it's socialist movement pressure has virtually no effect on policy.

Oh, well in that case all the neo-cons whining about universal care / socialized medicine are really worried about nothing, right? Please answer. If universal care is not a big part of socialism, then where is it? Is it a product of capitalism?

So since we have a Dem in office in January I guess we won't be capitalist anymore? Of course we will, having a different party in power just changes shades of what you are, we are still capitalists due to the market controlling the means of production and Canada is still primarily socialist even with the conservative party winning the last 2 elections.


Here, I'll teach you something about your own country:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_programs_in_Canada

Social programs in Canada include all government programs designed to give assistance to citizens outside of what the market provides. The Canadian social safety net covers a broad spectrums of programs, and because Canada is a federation, many are run by the provinces. Canada has a wide range of government transfer payments to individuals, which totaled $134.8 billion in 2005.[1] Only social programs that direct funds to individuals are included in that cost; programs such as medicare and public education are additional costs.

Generally speaking before the Great Depression most social services were provided by religious charities and other private groups. Changing government policy between the 1930s and 1960s saw the emergence of a welfare state, similar to many Western European countries. Most programs from that era are still in use, although many were scaled back during the 1990s as government priorities shifted towards reducing debt and deficit.

All provinces in Canada provide universal, publicly funded healthcare, with their costs partially subsidized by the federal government. Services not "listed" (covered by provincial plans) can be purchased privately, however Canada is unusual in banning the purchase of private insurance or care for any services that are listed.

Mandatory primary education is provided by all provinces for a nominal cost. Private education is also available but its comparatively high costs and the relative quality of public education prevent many parents of using it as compared to the United States or Britain. Secondary education is optional and therefore more expensive, while post-secondary is yet more expensive but it still subsidized to a great extent by the federal and provincial governments. Student loans also exist to ease costs.

Canadian mortgages are insured by the federal Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation and most provinces have ministries in charge of regulating the housing market.


So let's summarize:

Canada has:

- Social safety net http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_safety_net

- Universal health care http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_healthcare
In 1984, the Canada Health Act was passed, which prohibited extra billing by doctors on patients while at the same time billing the public insurance system. In 1999, the prime minister and most premiers reaffirmed in the Social Union Framework Agreement that they are committed to health care that has "comprehensiveness, universality, portability, public administration and accessibility."[27]

- Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) is a Crown corporation owned by the Government of Canada. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia...ng_Corporation

- "social assistance", "income support", "income assistance" and "welfare assistance";




So in spite of all of these services, Canada is not socialized? The gov provides healthcare for all, all of the basic USA stuff, has a safety net program and even owns the mortgage lending companies via the gov and you're not under a system of socialism huh? That's like the guy with weiner sticking out of his mouth saying he's not gay, his boyfriend is. Fine, you're 100% Nazified American Capitalist

[EBSB52]

I will say that the words Socialism, Communism, dictatorship, democracy have been battered around so much its hard to know what anybody means by them anymore.

In fact the USSR never considered itself a communist country. Communism was considered an ideal which would actually entail no government at all.

I'd consider countries like Canada capitalist. However some capitalist countries have discovered the need to address rudimentary concerns of their citizens.

Well, as our resident philosopher wrote, socialism is a system of collectivism and when you collect that capital and distribute it to the poor, that is socialism. Now to what degree? Who knows how to measure it, as you say, it's been bantered around so much to fit people'ss needs. But I've alwasy written here that Canadian Socialism is quasi, not pure.

[betplom]

So in spite of all of these services, Canada is not socialized? The gov provides healthcare for all, all of the basic USA stuff, has a safety net program and even owns the mortgage lending companies via the gov and you're not under a system of socialism huh? That's like the guy with weiner sticking out of his mouth saying he's not gay, his boyfriend is. Fine, you're 100% Nazified American Capitalist

LOL, good stuff, Math buddy, you seem to be overmatched here.

EBSB52 could also have mentioned that all but Ontario & Alberta have government owned/operated auto insurance for its citizens.

[EBSB52]

Well put. I laugh whenever someone throws out the word "Marxism". 99% of the time they don't even have a full grasp on more than 10% of Marxist concepts. True Marxism compiles so much shit it would take 20 years of full-time study to truly even get past the surface.

All of these words have so many complexities that it's ridiculous for people to assert they have a blatant out and out stance on a particular issue.

For sure, we started getting into it with my undergrad degree and it was overwhelming. I did get a good handle on it tho and what I took away was this:

Communism - means of production controlled by the gov

Socialism - means of production controlled by the people

Capitalism - means of production controlled by the market (market controlled by the elite)

This is the best way I can describe these ideologies in short.

[EBSB52]

Come to think of it, republicans has a point. you need a big military so people won't **** with you, and you can go **** with countries with no military. big military = bigger oversea economic interest = more profit at home. In this world, no one really takes you seriously unless you have a nuke. Kim Joon Lil might not be as crazy as you all think

Yea, no one ****s with us.... cough, 911, cough, cough.... Iran and many countries have demonstrated that they aren't afraid of us. They would rather we kill them than to give to our ethnocentric ways. N. Korea was defying us until they realized tehy couldn't get a missle off the ground. N. Viet Nam and N. Korea had no fear of us and they kicked our asses so we quit...AKA lost. You get to a point and you tell the bullies to fvck themselves. Huge militayr has done 2 things: Make us hated around the world and make us broke and 10.5 T in debt.

[dwaechte]

Oh, well in that case all the neo-cons whining about universal care / socialized medicine are really worried about nothing, right? Please answer. If universal care is not a big part of socialism, then where is it? Is it a product of capitalism?

So since we have a Dem in office in January I guess we won't be capitalist anymore? Of course we will, having a different party in power just changes shades of what you are, we are still capitalists due to the market controlling the means of production and Canada is still primarily socialist even with the conservative party winning the last 2 elections.


Here, I'll teach you something about your own country:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_programs_in_Canada

Social programs in Canada include all government programs designed to give assistance to citizens outside of what the market provides. The Canadian social safety net covers a broad spectrums of programs, and because Canada is a federation, many are run by the provinces. Canada has a wide range of government transfer payments to individuals, which totaled $134.8 billion in 2005.[1] Only social programs that direct funds to individuals are included in that cost; programs such as medicare and public education are additional costs.

Generally speaking before the Great Depression most social services were provided by religious charities and other private groups. Changing government policy between the 1930s and 1960s saw the emergence of a welfare state, similar to many Western European countries. Most programs from that era are still in use, although many were scaled back during the 1990s as government priorities shifted towards reducing debt and deficit.

All provinces in Canada provide universal, publicly funded healthcare, with their costs partially subsidized by the federal government. Services not "listed" (covered by provincial plans) can be purchased privately, however Canada is unusual in banning the purchase of private insurance or care for any services that are listed.

Mandatory primary education is provided by all provinces for a nominal cost. Private education is also available but its comparatively high costs and the relative quality of public education prevent many parents of using it as compared to the United States or Britain. Secondary education is optional and therefore more expensive, while post-secondary is yet more expensive but it still subsidized to a great extent by the federal and provincial governments. Student loans also exist to ease costs.

Canadian mortgages are insured by the federal Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation and most provinces have ministries in charge of regulating the housing market.


So let's summarize:

Canada has:

- Social safety net http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_safety_net

- Universal health care http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_healthcare
In 1984, the Canada Health Act was passed, which prohibited extra billing by doctors on patients while at the same time billing the public insurance system. In 1999, the prime minister and most premiers reaffirmed in the Social Union Framework Agreement that they are committed to health care that has "comprehensiveness, universality, portability, public administration and accessibility."[27]

- Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) is a Crown corporation owned by the Government of Canada. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia...ng_Corporation

- "social assistance", "income support", "income assistance" and "welfare assistance";




So in spite of all of these services, Canada is not socialized? The gov provides healthcare for all, all of the basic USA stuff, has a safety net program and even owns the mortgage lending companies via the gov and you're not under a system of socialism huh? That's like the guy with weiner sticking out of his mouth saying he's not gay, his boyfriend is. Fine, you're 100% Nazified American Capitalist

You're ridiculous. Don't patronize me with that "learn something about your own country" bullshit and read my post again. I'll admit the part about two straight conservative governments was a little off and pointless.

[EBSB52]

I'm Canadian, you moron.

The NDP is a fringe party that rarely gets more than 10-15% of the seats in our parliament. Apparently that makes Canada a socialist country? What a joke.

What's even funnier though is that you judge progress of different countries by comparing their exchange rate. Apparently, then, the UK has always had a better economy than America.

Again, socialism is defined in any reputable dictionary as:

An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.

Just because medicine is socialized [and even then partially privatized - you can go and buy all the medication you want, just can't pay a doctor for services] doesn't mean the basic means of production are primarily owned by government.

By the way, since Canada is so wonderful, you are always welcome to move here. We have very lax immigration standards.

As for my comment about looking for the 'most poor people', it is obviously meant in per capita terms.

Lucky for you you haven't been to a Canadian hospital where our wonderful universal coverage system forces me to wait 10 hours to get a broken finger fixed. I am not exaggerating.

Also enjoyed your comment about you being better educated than I am. You must be less than 2 years away from a PhD, then. Congrats.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm Canadian, you moron.


Who's the moron, you don't even know your own system of government. I illustrated it for you to ignore. I have respect for Canadians, I don't think they are all as stupid as you.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>The NDP is a fringe party that rarely gets more than 10-15% of the seats in our parliament. Apparently that makes Canada a socialist country? What a joke.


I don't care if the Nazi Party runs Canada, a country's system is measured by it's attributes, not it's label. So you have:

- Socialized univeral care

- Safety net programs

- Welfare out the ass

- 100% governemtn funded and controlled mortgage system


ANd yet you're a bit socialist? Hell, the US has socialist attrubutes about it, not many, but a few, far less than Canada. Canada is a quais-socialist nation, like it or not.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What's even funnier though is that you judge progress of different countries by comparing their exchange rate. Apparently, then, the UK has always had a better economy than America.


When you say a better economy, probably not a larger GDP, but a healthier one as reflected by its currency. Yes, as a nation grows stronger with its imports and general product, they virtually always have stronger currency. How would you measure a country's fiscal health? Do you think 10.5 T is healthy? Is 5T in the last 8 years OK or really bad?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Again, socialism is defined in any reputable dictionary as:

An economic system in which the basic means of production are primarily owned and controlled collectively, usually by government under some system.


I realize you're really proud of the 1 citation (not even cited really, just cut/pasted) you brought in, but if that's not Canadain quasi-socialims, then what is? ONE MORE TIME: THE GOVERNMENT LENDS MONEY FOR MORTGAGES, HOW IS THAT NOT COLLECTIVE? THE GOV PROVIDES HEALTHCARE FOR ALL WHO WANT IT: HOW IS THAT NOT COLLECTIVE?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Just because medicine is socialized [and even then partially privatized - you can go and buy all the medication you want, just can't pay a doctor for services] doesn't mean the basic means of production are primarily owned by government.


Yes it does. The government collects the revenue from the people and distributes it to all who need it, that's collectivism/redistribution. I don't care that you wish you lived in a purely capitalist nation, wheen I post that Canada is quasi-socialist I do so w/o you in mind, so don't take it personally. As well, I think socialism is great, I love Canada. I was born/raised in Seattle and we would go to Canada all the time, I went thru Windsor once; Canada is a beautiful country, far more than the US.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>By the way, since Canada is so wonderful, you are always welcome to move here. We have very lax immigration standards.


Is that how you got in? Apparently they don't have a naturalization test as they do here, you seem to think Canada is capitalist.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As for my comment about looking for the 'most poor people', it is obviously meant in per capita terms.

Fair enough, go do your research and support your point, I look forward to reading it.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lucky for you you haven't been to a Canadian hospital where our wonderful universal coverage system forces me to wait 10 hours to get a broken finger fixed. I am not exaggerating.


I haven't had medical insurance for years, so fortunately I don't have to deal with the horrid hospitals, I get to go to ER and pay 2k for that broken finger. You don't knwo how nice it is to have medical care always there...... you take it for granted.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.Also enjoyed your comment about you being better educated than I am. You must be less than 2 years away from a PhD, then. Congrats


You are ****ing lying. The way you write and fail to support a thing you claim...no fvcking way. In teh US, college educated people understand they have to support their assertions with something, I've dealt with a lot of college educated people and you are not one by my standards. What is your supposed major?

[dwaechte]

In teh US, college educated people understand they have to support their assertions with something, I've dealt with a lot of college educated people and you are not one by my standards. What is your supposed major?

That post was teh awesome.

[EBSB52]

Most people do not work for the government in Canada. Most assets are owned privately. Canadians choose where they want to work, they work for money and pay for things with it. There is no debate over whether Canada has a capitalist system.

If you found out you were 1/64th black, and I asked you whether you were white or black, what would you answer?

You're confusing socialism with communism. What you are describing, the government controlling the means of production, is communism, not socialism. When you have numerous social programs, have a system of collectivism (higher taxes than here), then you are socialist to some degree. Probably not as much as many European countires, but when you cross that line and have socialized meds, well, sorry, you are a quasi-socialist country. I think most would agree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_programs_in_Canada

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If you found out you were 1/64th black, and I asked you whether you were white or black, what would you answer?


That explains why I'm so well-hung I would say I'm partly generally white, but partly black.

If you looked 70% black but thought you were 90% white, if people commented upon your phenotype of black, would you constantly find yourself telling them how you're really not? See, the analogy works both ways. Until you address how such a so-called capitalist nation has all of the many social programs, you will appear largely socialist to the US. Even communist countries have currency, I have a Korean note with Kim's face on it here, so quit acting as if the gov owns all of everything. And that's communism, not quasi-socialism.

If I asked the neighborhood neo-con, he would tell me that Canada is grossly socialistic since the have socialized meds....can't have it both ways.

[EBSB52]

LOL, good stuff, Math buddy, you seem to be overmatched here.

EBSB52 could also have mentioned that all but Ontario & Alberta have government owned/operated auto insurance for its citizens.

Thank you, I didn't know that.

[EBSB52]

You're ridiculous. Don't patronize me with that "learn something about your own country" bullshit and read my post again. I'll admit the part about two straight conservative governments was a little off and pointless.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You're ridiculous.


Because????????????? Support your assertions. Make an argument; can you?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't patronize me with that "learn something about your own country" bullshit and read my post again.

You seem to think you aren't at least quasi-social yet I read a laundry list of social programs including the gov writes all mortgages and now I understand a couple provinces sell gov auto insurance. Instead of getting pissed at me, explain in some detail how you're not socialist. Compare your country to other socialist nations and tell me how you're so much less gov socialized.....never happen, huh? Then you've acquiesced.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.I'll admit the part about two straight conservative governments was a little off and pointless.


Not totally, it shows a trend away from it, but like Clinton, he instilled a few social programs, but they were stuck down as soon as crappy drawers took office. If you string together enough conservative parties, perhaps you can then become mostly capitalist. The measuring stick here in the US is that if you have socialized meds you are in the door to being at the very least, quasi-socialist. I know you are used to it and think it's normal, try living here for a while and see what it's like and see if you think of Canada in a socialist light. Everything is relative, so that's a lot of it. Enjoy your soc meds, I think a lot of you guys take em for granted. I envy most Canadians.

[EBSB52]

That post was teh awesome.

Your point? Esp at the Ma level with a thesis statement or the PhD level with a Dissertation. These are books you must write and support. I realize this is a posting board, but try to go from a little more than your life experience.

[dwaechte]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You're ridiculous.


Because????????????? Support your assertions. Make an argument; can you?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't patronize me with that "learn something about your own country" bullshit and read my post again.

You seem to think you aren't at least quasi-social yet I read a laundry list of social programs including the gov writes all mortgages and now I understand a couple provinces sell gov auto insurance. Instead of getting pissed at me, explain in some detail how you're not socialist. Compare your country to other socialist nations and tell me how you're so much less gov socialized.....never happen, huh? Then you've acquiesced.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.I'll admit the part about two straight conservative governments was a little off and pointless.


Not totally, it shows a trend away from it, but like Clinton, he instilled a few social programs, but they were stuck down as soon as crappy drawers took office. If you string together enough conservative parties, perhaps you can then become mostly capitalist. The measuring stick here in the US is that if you have socialized meds you are in the door to being at the very least, quasi-socialist. I know you are used to it and think it's normal, try living here for a while and see what it's like and see if you think of Canada in a socialist light. Everything is relative, so that's a lot of it. Enjoy your soc meds, I think a lot of you guys take em for granted. I envy most Canadians.

I'm not going to sit here and spend 20 minutes researching and making a long argument. I'm not interested in that sort of thing. The only reason I came in this thread was because I find it somewhat interesting, and I replied because I found your arrogance a little obnoxious.

It comes down to the fact that both Canada and America, and most countries for that matter, are flat out mixed economies. To say Canada is a socialist country is dead wrong, and that's what you were saying earlier. Is Canada slightly more socialist than America? Yes. But they're both mixed economies that in the grand scheme of things, I view as very similar. The list of issues where Canada has more socialist aspects is tiny in comparison to the list of issues where Canadian and American policy is practically identical.

[betplom]

I'm not going to sit here and spend 20 minutes researching and making a long argument. I'm not interested in that sort of thing. The only reason I came in this thread was because I find it somewhat interesting, and I replied because I found your arrogance a little obnoxious.

It comes down to the fact that both Canada and America, and most countries for that matter, are flat out mixed economies. To say Canada is a socialist country is dead wrong, and that's what you were saying earlier. Is Canada slightly more socialist than America? Yes. But they're both mixed economies that in the grand scheme of things, I view as very similar. The list of issues where Canada has more socialist aspects is tiny in comparison to the list of issues where Canadian and American policy is practically identical.

Just goes to show how people are different.

I found his information informative and would disagree that he came across as arrogant and obnoxious, while I can comprehend the ideas and beliefs written I could never explain things as well as others, my writing skills are nowhere near the level of some of the participants in this thread.

Personally I found it interesting to hear an American speaking about the benefits of social policies in Canada.

I have American and Canadian family members, the American ones now live here in Canada, life seems to be a bit more comfortable here and they don't have the same worries they had when living in the US. These are blue-collar working class people, they appreciate the health care and government programs offered.

My American family members were amazed to see television commercials made by the provincial government regarding quit smoking programs offered for it's citizens, they'd never seen anything similar while in the USA.

The "baby bonus" program was of interest as well.

Have a look at some of the offerings of the Ontario Government:

http://www.gov.on.ca/ont/portal/!ut/p/.cmd/cs/.ce/7_0_A/.s/7_0_252/_s.7_0_A/7_0_252/_l/en?docid=EC001021

[dwaechte]

Just goes to show how people are different.

I found his information informative and would disagree that he came across as arrogant and obnoxious, while I can comprehend the ideas and beliefs written I could never explain things as well as others, my writing skills are nowhere near the level of some of the participants in this thread.

Personally I found it interesting to hear an American speaking about the benefits of social policies in Canada.

I have American and Canadian family members, the American ones now live here in Canada, life seems to be a bit more comfortable here and they don't have the same worries they had when living in the US.

As the thread went on I was certainly impressed with his knowledge and ability to convey it. He's well ahead of me in both areas. However, I don't think he had an open mind on many issues, which is a much more important trait in my opinion.

I'm very left wing, and I'm a firm believer of our social policies and programs, but that doesn't mean I don't think that laissez-faire conservatives don't have merit, or that they're all filled with greed and only plan to corrupt. There's a reason we have mixed economies; there's a delicate balance between innovation and equality.

[EBSB52]

I'm not going to sit here and spend 20 minutes researching and making a long argument. I'm not interested in that sort of thing. The only reason I came in this thread was because I find it somewhat interesting, and I replied because I found your arrogance a little obnoxious.

It comes down to the fact that both Canada and America, and most countries for that matter, are flat out mixed economies. To say Canada is a socialist country is dead wrong, and that's what you were saying earlier. Is Canada slightly more socialist than America? Yes. But they're both mixed economies that in the grand scheme of things, I view as very similar. The list of issues where Canada has more socialist aspects is tiny in comparison to the list of issues where Canadian and American policy is practically identical.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm not going to sit here and spend 20 minutes researching and making a long argument. I'm not interested in that sort of thing.


OK, so I guess you acquiesce.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The only reason I came in this thread was because I find it somewhat interesting, and I replied because I found your arrogance a little obnoxious.


But if I made flawed arguments w/o supporting data/citation you wouldn't find them as bad, right? That's how it works.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It comes down to the fact that both Canada and America, and most countries for that matter, are flat out mixed economies.


Wihout a doubt. But to say Canada and America have the same amount of socialism is ridiculous. Canada certainly has enough to be considered quasi-socialist, but you are use to it so you don't think so.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>To say Canada is a socialist country is dead wrong, and that's what you were saying earlier.


I've always claimed Canada is quasi-socialist, never here or elsewhere referred to it as full-on socialist.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Is Canada slightly more socialist than America? Yes. But they're both mixed economies that in the grand scheme of things, I view as very similar.


Of course you do, you don't like socialism and therefore you want to revise the thruth. Slightly? Yea, whatever. Socialized meds, social safety nets out the ass and gov sponsored mortgages and auto ins..... keep on a tokin bro ..... your awesome country is quasi-social..... noit that it's a bad thing.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The list of issues where Canada has more socialist aspects is tiny in comparison to the list of issues where Canadian and American policy is practically identical.


Maybe from your position, but from an Amerian's position you guys are really much more socialized than us. That comes from libs and neo-cons alike. Now, is your position that Canada and the US are similar ideologically typical amongst Candians, maybe, but not here. And again, objectively, if you have 100% soc meds and 100% mortgage by the gov, well, you're eaily quasi-soc.

[EBSB52]

Just goes to show how people are different.

I found his information informative and would disagree that he came across as arrogant and obnoxious, while I can comprehend the ideas and beliefs written I could never explain things as well as others, my writing skills are nowhere near the level of some of the participants in this thread.

Personally I found it interesting to hear an American speaking about the benefits of social policies in Canada.

I have American and Canadian family members, the American ones now live here in Canada, life seems to be a bit more comfortable here and they don't have the same worries they had when living in the US. These are blue-collar working class people, they appreciate the health care and government programs offered.

My American family members were amazed to see television commercials made by the provincial government regarding quit smoking programs offered for it's citizens, they'd never seen anything similar while in the USA.

The "baby bonus" program was of interest as well.

Have a look at some of the offerings of the Ontario Government:

http://www.gov.on.ca/ont/portal/!ut/p/.cmd/cs/.ce/7_0_A/.s/7_0_252/_s.7_0_A/7_0_252/_l/en?docid=EC001021

Interesting. Yea, I think a lot of Canadians take a lot of social programs for granted. I worked at Bombardier in Tucson recently and there were a lot of Canadians here on long-term assignment. They were basically disgusted with the lack of healthcare. One guy had a wife bust an appendix and they had Amrican insurance, but it didn't pay much, he said it's basically catastrophe insurance that would be nice if you needed heart surgery. He said in Canada he would just have gone and had the surgery, his wife that is, and it would cost him zero.

If it wasn't so f'n cold up there I'd be there Beautiful place, no doubt. I'm hoping Obama brings shit around, if not I gotta get outta here.

[EBSB52]

As the thread went on I was certainly impressed with his knowledge and ability to convey it. He's well ahead of me in both areas. However, I don't think he had an open mind on many issues, which is a much more important trait in my opinion.

I'm very left wing, and I'm a firm believer of our social policies and programs, but that doesn't mean I don't think that laissez-faire conservatives don't have merit, or that they're all filled with greed and only plan to corrupt. There's a reason we have mixed economies; there's a delicate balance between innovation and equality.

I'm very open-minded, but you have to convince me. You have no duty to to do shit and tell me to FO for all I care, but I think I have laid a fair argument on 2 issues:

- Republicans have devistated the country over the last 3 decades and Dems have been the good guys in this timeframe.

- Socialism, at least quasi is better than American Capitalism.

And as a side argument I think I have illustrated how Canada is quasi-socialist as an objective standard. Let me tell ya brother, as an American they seem full Socialist, but I am objective and realize this is not so.

I live in Arizona, one of the most Nazi states in America, and as far as welfare here, it's virtually nonexistent. Unemployment runs for 6 months then fvck you, go die in the streets. I'm not kidding, no retraining, no extension, go fvck off and die. Now blue states like Cali and Washington have retraining and extensions. Oh, and AZ had the lowest unemployment comp at 185 week until 5 years ago, now it's 240, probably still in the bottom 5 or 10. I'll pull over to homeless people and give em 10 bucks and talk to them. These are not druggy wastoids, these are normal looking people in the streets.


But to worry about my status of open mind or not is nuts, that's an ad hominem; convice me based upon the merits, or are you afraid of becoming convinced yourself? You haven't even scraped the surface of my data either, just waiting for a valid, supported argument.


>>>>>>>> I'm very left wing, and I'm a firm believer of our social policies and programs, but that doesn't mean I don't think that laissez-faire conservatives don't have merit, or that they're all filled with greed and only plan to corrupt.


Right, because Candian conservatism is like American Liberalness. We are probably on the same page, just getting bent on the semantics of what we call it. American Nazi-filled conservatism is on the way out. When Clinton introduced uni care meds in 93, I didn't want it and the country didn't either. Now I think most want it. Obama could be on par with the likes of Washington, Lincoln, FDR, etc if he pulls this off. I really do believe he wants to make it happen, not just fill a suit and go on vacation 200 days a year.