It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TheJourney
Given that you think a system which forces people to buy insurance from private companies exemplifies 'socialism' you clearly have no clue what you're talking about on the subject and therefore your opinion may be safely disregarded.
: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
Sounds like ACA could be considered socialism. That is why there is federal fine/fee is you do not pay in. It is controlled by the state and created for the whole and not the individual. Check your information before discarding other peoples opinion.
www.merriam-webster.com...
And the wealthy get a real laugh about miserly people who are nowhere near wealthy, but rant and rave against the government not 'taking their money' to help the less fortunate...they thank you too...enjoy your extra chump change, they will enjoy their trillions...as long as the poor don't get helped and we don't elevate the lifestyle of the majority and lower income families, it's ok.
originally posted by: kellynap43
originally posted by: TheJourney
Given that you think a system which forces people to buy insurance from private companies exemplifies 'socialism' you clearly have no clue what you're talking about on the subject and therefore your opinion may be safely disregarded.
: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
Sounds like ACA could be considered socialism. That is why there is federal fine/fee is you do not pay in. It is controlled by the state and created for the whole and not the individual. Check your information before discarding other peoples opinion.
www.merriam-webster.com...
And the wealthy get a real laugh about miserly people who are nowhere near wealthy, but rant and rave against the government not 'taking their money' to help the less fortunate...they thank you too...enjoy your extra chump change, they will enjoy their trillions...as long as the poor don't get helped and we don't elevate the lifestyle of the majority and lower income families, it's ok.
Not sure if this could be defined as a statement or just rambling, so I cant respond.
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: whyamIhere
I actually insinuated you are smarter than to fall for Trump's bs.
Each to their own.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sremmos80
The issue with Halliburton is that it is the ONLY American company of its kind currently. There are other companies that can do the same kind of contracting work, but every one of them is foreign. So in order to let those contracts go to a different source, you are talking about outsourcing, a political issue in and of itself.
Maybe the issue should be to examine WHY Halliburton is the only American company that is able to fulfill those kinds of government contracts. Is there something about the labor/business environment in the US that chased off those other companies or prevents their formation? Or is it a matter of how the contracts are written by the government? Could the labor required of Halliburton be broken among smaller companies? Or is it a mixture of the two?
originally posted by: Loveaduck
a reply to: gladtobehere
Bernie Sanders is a "nothing" in the same way Jimmy Carter has been a big fat "nothing" all his life. If he isn't a larger than life bufoon carrying a big stick, he won't get any attention in gnat span.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: TheJourney
That you think money becomes less of an issue when the medicine is socialized is laughable.
Ask Canadians why their goods and services are more expensive on average than ours ... taxes to pay for their health care.
Ask the Canadians why their tax rates tend to be higher ... taxes to pay for their health care.
So instead of noticing the hit up front, you think you are getting it free. That's a lie; you are instead getting bled all year long in a thousand different ways for it. Death by a thousand financial paper cuts.
originally posted by: gladtobehere
This lame duck, do nothing, career politician has been in Congress since 1990.
Hes a self-described "democratic socialist".
For some odd reason, hes now getting a lot of positive attention (especially on ATS) but I'm not sure why.
Sanders is a typical socialist who wants the government to confiscate more of my hard earned money so it can be redistributed in the form of illegitimate social programs like Obamacare.
He's flip-flopped on the 2nd Amendment mainly because the constituents in his home state are pro-2A, its the only way he could get their support to ensure a win.
He initially seemed like an ally with regards to the Pauls' Federal Reserve bill but he flaked on that too.
Ron Paul says Bernie Sanders 'sold out' on Fed amendment.
I could go on but I think you guys get the point.
Dont get me wrong, if you support big government, anti-gun, socialist liberals, hes your man.
Speaking on behalf of everyone else, no thank you.
originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: gladtobehere
Bravo, the more idiotic stuff like this I read about Bernie the more apt I am to vote for him
Oh what your feeling is called the Bern! Get used to it. A political revolution is coming and Bernie is leading the charge.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Sremmos80
The one thing a private business has that government does not is the need to work against a budget and against the idea that if they do not produce the desired results, they can be fired.
Tell me the last time the government actually worried about coming in under budget or how we fire the government if it fails to produce the desired results.