Obamacare

[WVProgressive 56]

4 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

That's where you are incorrect.  I completely agree that big business is in bed with government (which is how we get so much corporate welfare, regulations that are very harmful to small business, etc.).

But that's what always happens when you have a system that concentrates power and wealth in the hands of a select few, and that system is capitalism.

4 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

  It's up to the people to defend their rights and freedoms

I agree.

4 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

However, there are still those who will fight against those forces which are hostile to liberty.

What are these forces to you? The business owners who force people into either servitude, or poverty? The politicians who strengthen the business owners hold by passing pro-business and anti-worker legislation. The police and military who defend this system? Regardless, if you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then I'm glad to call you a friend of mine.

[Patine 470]

1 hour ago, WVProgressive said:

Regardless, if you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then I'm glad to call you a friend of mine.

I had thought I was the only one here who literally TREMBLED with indignation, and even rage (and frustration at others' complacence and acceptingness of them) at all these injustices, even while actually typing my, at times, long-winded and semi-coherent posts. I'm glad to know I have kindred spirits there.

[Talique 0]

I support Medicare for All

[WVProgressive 56]

1 hour ago, Patine said:

I had thought I was the only one here who literally TREMBLED with indignation, and even rage (and frustration at others' complacence and acceptingness of them) at all these injustices, even while actually typing my, at times, long-winded and semi-coherent posts. I'm glad to know I have kindred spirits there.

21 minutes ago, Talique said:

I support Medicare for All

I prefer nationalized healthcare, which is really the only way we're going to rebuild healthcare infrastructure in rural areas.

[Guest]

On 12/19/2018 at 8:23 PM, WVProgressive said:

I prefer nationalized healthcare, which is really the only way we're going to rebuild healthcare infrastructure in rural areas.

Now how do you pay for it?

[WVProgressive 56]

1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

Now how do you pay for it?

Oh damn you got me, how will a government that has the ability to both tax, and print it's own currency pay for that, I'm bested, there's truly no way to pay for something like this. Funny how "how do you pay for it" never comes up with regards to something like endless war, because sending "advisors" to destroy a country and even then getting their ass kicked (usually by people just a decade ago they were giving weapons and training to) is more important than actually taking care of the people who worked to build this country.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

Oh damn you got me, how will a government that has the ability to both tax, and print it's own currency pay for that, I'm bested, there's truly no way to pay for something like this. Funny how "how do you pay for it" never comes up with regards to something like endless war, because sending "advisors" to destroy a country and even then getting their ass kicked (usually by people just a decade ago they were giving weapons and training to) is more important than actually taking care of the people who worked to build this country.

I don't see any reason why it shouldn't come up for anything else as well including the military-industrial complex.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, WVProgressive said:

Oh damn you got me, how will a government that has the ability to both tax, and print it's own currency pay for that, I'm bested, there's truly no way to pay for something like this. Funny how "how do you pay for it" never comes up with regards to something like endless war, because sending "advisors" to destroy a country and even then getting their ass kicked (usually by people just a decade ago they were giving weapons and training to) is more important than actually taking care of the people who worked to build this country.

More precisely, which taxes are you raising?

[WVProgressive 56]

Just now, NYrepublican said:

More precisely, which taxes are you raising?

Alright you know how we tax income, well right now we have hundreds of people with more wealth than anyone would really need unless you want to buy a fleet of pleasure yachts, what if we taxed already hoarded wealth, or, even just taxed already dead people, who's going to get upset if Jeff Bezos keels over and his trillions are put to use actually making people's lives better.

[Reagan04 658]

4 hours ago, WVProgressive said:

Alright you know how we tax income, well right now we have hundreds of people with more wealth than anyone would really need unless you want to buy a fleet of pleasure yachts, what if we taxed already hoarded wealth, or, even just taxed already dead people, who's going to get upset if Jeff Bezos keels over and his trillions are put to use actually making people's lives better.

Has anyone ever told you that you're a firecracker?

[WVProgressive 56]

1 hour ago, Reagan04 said:

Has anyone ever told you that you're a firecracker?

No. Is that a complement, where you come from? 

[WVProgressive 56]

12 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

I don't see any reason why it shouldn't come up for anything else as well including the military-industrial complex.

Funny how that never comes up when in beltway discussion of America's imperial conquest, look at the utterly unhinged, and virtually unanimous anger of, the establishment wings of both parties, the "military & intelligence community", and the MSNBC/neocon axis, when Trump announced he was withdrawing US troops from Syria. Nothing unites politicians and members of legacy media like ending our never ending war. Hell you'll even see otherwise progressive people calling people like Tulsi Gabbard, a dictator apologist, because not-wanting the US to take over a country from a democratically elected leader (a lot of people don't know that, Bashar al-Assad was elected democratically), fighting salafi wahhabists, is equal to supporting Pinochet or the House of Sued (but they'd never criticize that because, Pinochet and the Saudis are friends of America and her business), and then have the gall to say they're doing it for the Kurd's sake when they'd only support Kurdish liberation(and this is true of every third world country that tries to pursue democracy) is if Americas candidate is electable. These kinds of people will claim "well I'm all for bringing the troops home but x (in this case protecting the Kurd's)" really are just saying"I hate war but we won't be safe till every bodies dead". Oh and before you call me an Assad apologist, yes, I know that he's not a terrific leader, and I support YPG/PKK in their fight for Kurdish liberation, but if their was a serious Syrian (not Kurdish) leftist alternative, I'd support that, but there really isn't one, and condemning the genocidal actions of NATO does not necessarily translate to supporting the Baathist regime.

[Talique 0]

On ‎12‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 11:32 PM, WVProgressive said:

Funny how that never comes up when in beltway discussion of America's imperial conquest, look at the utterly unhinged, and virtually unanimous anger of, the establishment wings of both parties, the "military & intelligence community", and the MSNBC/neocon axis, when Trump announced he was withdrawing US troops from Syria. Nothing unites politicians and members of legacy media like ending our never ending war. Hell you'll even see otherwise progressive people calling people like Tulsi Gabbard, a dictator apologist, because not-wanting the US to take over a country from a democratically elected leader (a lot of people don't know that, Bashar al-Assad was elected democratically), fighting salafi wahhabists, is equal to supporting Pinochet or the House of Sued (but they'd never criticize that because, Pinochet and the Saudis are friends of America and her business), and then have the gall to say they're doing it for the Kurd's sake when they'd only support Kurdish liberation(and this is true of every third world country that tries to pursue democracy) is if Americas candidate is electable. These kinds of people will claim "well I'm all for bringing the troops home but x (in this case protecting the Kurd's)" really are just saying"I hate war but we won't be safe till every bodies dead". Oh and before you call me an Assad apologist, yes, I know that he's not a terrific leader, and I support YPG/PKK in their fight for Kurdish liberation, but if their was a serious Syrian (not Kurdish) leftist alternative, I'd support that, but there really isn't one, and condemning the genocidal actions of NATO does not necessarily translate to supporting the Baathist regime.

So True