You know, it's Funny. When I Write Posts like the One Below this One, what I am Really Waiting for and Maybe even Fishing for is for Someone Else to Inspire me to Write Something in the Way in which they Comment on what I've Said and it just so Happens that the First to Respond to me was Malcolm and the Subject that he has Inspired is that of Racism, as well as the False Accusations of Racism.
I have just been Responding to One of His Posts, Heroes and Villains, and Feeling sort of Tired while doing so. If you Like, you can go there and Read the Post, as well as my Response to it. Before Getting into the Subject of Racism, I'd Like to Talk about something else that Relates to the Judging of People's Motives.
In the Next Post Down from this One, I was just Explaining to Malcolm how I haven't Figured Out a System yet for Deciding what to Read and what not to and When I Get too Caught Up in Responding on Other Blogs, I Neglect my Own Blog. This Problem has Lead to the Problem of Deciding whether or not there are People I should Ignore, as well as also Wondering how I should go about Doing so.
The Problem is that People have a Tendency to Assume the Motives of those who Ignore them and Think that it is because we have nothing more to say and have Run Out of Good Arguments, yet the Reality is that People can Only do so much and Some People who Appear Unwilling to Learn anything from any of the Arguments that are Presented are not Worthy of the Time that it Takes in Order to Continue to Argue with them. This is One Assumption that I Absolutely Hate, especially when I Feel Over Whelmed and Have no Choice but to Ignore.
Also, the Stress that Causes my Feeling of Being Over Whelmed is Usually Caused by More than One Source and for any One of those Sources to Assume that they are the Primary Cause of my Discomfort and Incorrectly Assumed Lack of Things to Say would again be Assuming my Motives Incorrectly.
False Assumptions is also the Main Problem with the Accusation of Racism. It Assumes Motive and such can not be Proved. About the Only Accusation that is Legitimate is that of Name Calling, yet even that must be Proved. If there are some who say that such Happened and Others that Deny it, then it is Simply One Person's Word Against Another.
There are Possible Motives for Objecting to the Mosque at Ground Zero, for Example, other than Racism. The Primary Complaint is the Location, not the Building of the Mosque. To Assume Racism is to Assume Motive and it is not Possible to Know that to be the Motive.
There are also other Possible Motives for Objecting to Amnesty and Illegal, rather than Legal, Immigration. Mostly the Reason for this is that Offering all these Programs to Illegals is Bankrupting Certain States and also Our Country. This is Actually Part of the Health Care Problem as well, yet no One Wants to Look at that Side of the Issue. Wouldn't it be Better to just Make Legal Immigration Easier?
You can't call these things Racism, for such is just Side Stepping the Valid Reasons Offered for these Positions.
I shouldn't have to Mention this one, but Assuming that all those who Voted Against Obama did so because of Racism is Equally Invalid. Come On!! Do you Honestly Believe that there is no Other Reason than that for Voting against a Very Strongly Left Leaning Democrat? Give me a Break!!
Though my Focus was Race in this Post, the Comments Took Off in the Direction of False Assumptions Relating to Obama being a Socialist, the Economy & Health Care. My Next Post is Meant to be a Continuation of this Post and any Further Discussion about Either Racism or False Assumptions of any Kind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
36 comments:
Whatever reason for voting against Obama, he is no socialist ...
That's an Interesting Twist on the Topic of Racism and False Assumptions. It's not Actually Off Topic because what is Implied is that Calling Obama a Socialist is a False Assumption.
Actually, the Way I Understand the Republican Concern is that we are Continually Moving Towards Socialism, not that we are Socialist, and that Democrats are the Ones that Keep Moving us in that Direction.
As to the Linked Article...
"Corporations turned in record profits this past 3rd quarter. What does that mean?"
Perhaps it Means that Obama's Policies are not yet in Place and he is not Getting his Way in Relation to the Increasing of Taxes. Perhaps it Means that the Election of a Bunch of Republicans this November has Saved the Day.
"Obama has proven time and time again that he is pro-business and has no interest in nationalizing anything."
He is Trying to Nationalize Health Care.
"Conservative bullshit"
Ok. Enough with the Name Calling.
"Their goal was to keep the economy hamstrung for their own political benefit."
That's Assumption of Motive. Republicans have said the Same thing about Liberals.
If the Things Said in this Article are True, then this is Good News, but I Interpret the Reasons Differently. If the Economy is, In Fact, Improving, it is because of the Fact that the Election of a Bunch of Republicans in the House has Given People Hope. When it Comes to Economy, Hope is just as Important as any Form of Direct Action.
Thanks for Commenting, BB, and what you Presented was Interesting.
Politics is placing blame.
Economics is independent;
the fact that corporate profits set a record last year, while laying off US workers, is indicative of
global economics. Did you realise that US corporations created over
1.4 million jobs last year...all overseas?
The 'election of a bunch of Republicans' gives me no hope whatsoever, but we shall see.
Democrats are more Hopeful when Democrats are in Power, but Republicans are more Hopeful when Republicans are in Power. Though there Tend to be a High Percentage of Democrats in the Country, the Percentage of Republican Businessmen is Higher than that of Democrats and it is when Businessmen have Hope, that the Economy Improves.
"Though there Tend to be a High Percentage of Democrats in the Country, the Percentage of Republican Businessmen is Higher than that of Democrats and it is when Businessmen have Hope, that the Economy Improves."
Seems like it should work that way...but when folks
have no work, they have no money and they don't spend!
Most voters don't know that the stock market historically does better under the democrats..and economists are still trying to figure that one out....
What drives your political stance is whether you're more concerned about people or profits.
For example, health care reform is not and has not ever been about 'nationalizing' health care, but it's a handy phrase that Republicans use to fraudently terrify the average person into believing that America is being 'socialised'.
They like to claim that 'the best healthcare in the world' (again, a fraudulent claim) is going to be 'dismantled' and turned into 'death panels' that ration your healthcare. All of these are false and specifically designed to elicit an emotional reaction based on preconditioning (and the ingrained belief that all things not American are socialist, communist, or otherwise inferior).
The fact is that half the country hasn't had real access to healthcare and that the disparity is telling on us. The fact is that American health care has poorer outcomes than 36 (THIRTY SIX) other nations on the planet. The fact is that we are virtually the only civilized, industrialized nation that doesn't have some sort of provision for national health care. The fact is that we place profits before people.
Republicans would like to continue to place those profits before people and be concerned about businesses and money, rather than being concerned more about the health of our nation and of our children and our elders, and being humble enough to look honestly at systems that are and continue to give better outcomes than ours does. I realize it's hard for the American psyche to admit that it's not 'THE BEST' at something and harder to refrain from calling everything non-American 'Socialist', but perhaps it's time for a dose of collective reality and pride-swallowing in the interest of our future.
You Know, BB, you are very Intelligent and it Surprises me at Times when I have to Explain Things to you that, from a Republican Point of View, are Very Basic.
Yes, When People have no Work, they have no Money, yet they have no Work because the Business Man is Discouraged and Afraid to Take the Risks that are Required in Order to Grow his Business and Create more Jobs. This is Basic, BB. It Really Puzzles me when you do not Appear to Understand this.
As to the Link, Once again it is Based on the Political Party Associated with the President and Says Nothing about who was in Control of the Congress at the Time. It could be that a Republican Congress and Democratic President is a Better Combination than a Republican President and Democratic Congress.
If this is so, then that is Interesting, yet this still does not in anyway Prove that the Democratic Way of Thinking is Superior to the Republican Way of Thinking. It is Important to Review all the Facts and not just the Ones that Support your Own Personal Opinions.
Satyavati,
Oh My! I've got such Intelligent Commenters that Challenge me like Crazy.
Those Republicans that Only Care about Money and Profits and not People are the Ones that I am all the Time Accusing of Extremism and the Democrats have Every Right to be Angry at them because Many of them are Quite Arrogant and Selfish.
I've Heard such Negatives about Socialized Medicine, though, and a lot of it has been Directed at Canada. Even I've Seen Evidence of how anything that the Government is Controlling is Less Efficient.
Take Veterans Benefits, for Example. Any Time that we Decide to Use Them, we have to Wait Awhile for an Appointment, Operation and/or Medical Test. And there are no Veterans Hospitals near by. The Closest Ones Require 1 Hour and 45 Minutes to Drive to (100 Miles, Give or Take, Depending on which Hospital). If we Use Our Regular Insurance, we have to Pay more with our Large Deductibles and yet even So, sometimes we Choose to Pay the Deductible, rather than to Wait for the Free Service that TAKES FOREVER.
If we Choose to Pay, rather than Use what's "Free", then what does that Tell you?
I have not Found Adequate Evidence that the Republican's "Scare Tactics" Reflect Things that are not True.
"designed to elicit an emotional reaction"
That's an Assumption of Motive.
I just Think that Obama's Program is Excessive and Expensive. That's all. I'm not Opposed to Absolutely Everything in his Health Care Package.
"they have no Work because the Business Man is Discouraged and Afraid to Take the Risks that are Required in Order to Grow his Business and Create more Jobs." Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Trickle Down theory
(sometimes termed the two story outhouse)is the GOP
answer..pamper the corporation and the rich and wonderful things will happen. ...yeah, right.
I repeat..corporate profits are at an all time high. Why? How? Simple, really - productivity has gone up-real wages have not. Adam Smith noted that
all wealth is created by labor and Abraham Lincoln
observed that "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights." I agree with
Saty, it is hard to pity
the business man when families are homeless..he can buy politicians, but
they are desperate. Unfortunatley, the GOP
has the image of everything for capital,
screw labor.
The reason you hear such negatives about socialized medicine is because it's a system that doesn't favour making money above everything else, and in America, that's enough to disqualify it.
Again, though, there is nothing about socialising medicine in the health care reform package. To allow people to continue with private insurers, while creating a pool that will allow the rest of the population to purchase insurance.. is NOT 'socialising medicine'. It's NOT 'putting government in charge of healthcare'. It's giving everyone equal access to healthcare.
Socialising medicine would mean that the entire healthcare system becomes a functionary of the government and thus that all healthcare workers become government employees. It would eliminate private insurers. None of this has or ever will happen.
The United States has piss-poor outcomes per healthcare dollar spent. For all the money Americans spend on healthcare, the results, the outcomes, the actual statistics show that thirty six countries do it better and for less money.
It's a reflex for Americans to believe that anything American is necessarily better than anything any other country can produce, and it is viscerally painful for Americans to even attempt to entertain the notion that there are, actually, some things they do better elsewhere and for cheaper. Unfortunately for the collective psyche, healthcare is indeed one of them.
There is no doubt that the VA system needs work. But to assume that healthcare reform would mean that all healthcare delivery in the United States would be modeled on the VA is untrue.
And do you not agree that terms such as 'death panel' and 'Socialist' are designed to elicit emotional reactions? Sarah Palin talking about how a government panel is going to decide whether Grandma lives or dies (all completely and irretrievably fraudulent, btw) can hardly be construed in any other way but as designed to invoke fear and horror in anyone who hears those words, without doing any independent research to see if she's at all close to speaking the truth (she wasn't).
The art of propaganda is the art of using words to elicit the reactions you desire. Read Mein Kampf. Hitler was the most successful propagandist in the history of humankind.
I Base my Ideas of what I have Learned in an Economy Class, BB. Low Prices = More Sells and High Prices = Less Sells. That is how Economy Works in Relation to the Consumer and This can be Charted on a Graph. There is a Similar Principle at Hand in Relation to the Businessman that has to do with the Cost of Doing Business and that is Low Cost = More Business Activity and High Cost = Less Business Activity and Regulations = Increased Cost.
This is Basic Economics, BB, and has Absolutely Nothing to do with "Pampering" or "Pity" (Emotionally Charged Words).
I Guess you Could say that if you "Pity" and "Pamper" the Consumer, he will Buy more Product. That is if that is the Language that you Want to Use. Well, the Same is True of the Business Man, as is True of the Consumer. "Pamper", if that's what you want to Call it, the Business Man and he will Produce more Jobs.
You can be Angry about this all that you Want to, but that is not Going to Change the Basic Economic Principle that is at Work Here.
That Two Story Out Outhouse is Sort of Funny, lol, yet I rather Doubt that if you Remove the Second Story, that will Produce more Jobs.
I already Explained Why; Because Bush's Tax Cuts have not been Removed and the Other Reason is because of the Increase of the Number of Businesses that have Moved a lot of what they are Doing Over Seas.
Unfortunately, Anger Over how Unfair Things are does not Cause Business Men to Produce Jobs any more than Anger at the Poor, that Republicans Consider "Lazy" (Another Emotionally Charged Word) Causes them Get off of Welfare and Go Find Jobs.
Yes, there are Arrogant and Selfish Republicans, but not all are this way and Yes, there is such a Thing as a "Lazy" Poor Person, but not all are this Way. We Need to Stop Assuming, Accusing and Stereo Typing and Learn to Work Together.
Satyavati,
"The reason you hear such negatives about socialized medicine is because it's a system that doesn't favour making money above everything else, and in America, that's enough to disqualify it."
I Understand what you are Saying, Satyavati, but it doesn't Explain my Own Personal Experience with these so Called, Veterans Benefits.
Republicans Fear that Private Insurers will not be Able to Compete with the Government Program and will go Out of Business. It just so Happens that Our Health Insurance has Gone Up Recently and some Say that the Coming of Obama Care has something to do with it.
"None of this has or ever will happen."
This is just your Opinion and you do not Know this for Sure.
"And do you not agree that terms such as 'death panel' and 'Socialist' are designed to elicit emotional reactions?"
This is Only So if the Possibilities of such is Non-Existent. For Example, if I Said "Watch Out for that Cliff!!" this would only be Inappropriate if there was no Cliff to Watch Out for. You are Assuming Motive and do not Know that the Motive is to Produce Irrational and Unnecessary Fear. You do not Know the Motive of Sarah Palin, or of anyone Else.
Do me a Favor, though, and do not Mentioned Names. I Know that you do not Like Sarah Palin. I Prefer to Talk about Issues, though, whether than Politicians and the Reason Why is because this just Starts the sort of Mud Slinging Wars that I Really don't Care for. Sarah Palin is not Currently in Office, has no Power to Put any Policies in Place and the Discussion of Potential Candidates is not the Subject of this Post.
Sarah Palin is also not the Only One who has Ever Spoken of Death Panels. It's a Republican Concern. Republicans have Said it; Which Ones Specifically does not Concern me at the Moment.
Getting back to the Issue, though, if someone Warns me about a Cliff, I'm Going to Remain Cautious Until Proof is Established that the Cliff in not there.
Okay, Lista.
Let's think about this. Twice I've said that healthcare reform does NOT mean that a VA system would be put in place, but you continue to be concerned about the issues that you see with the VA, as if you feel that those same issues would become pervasive throughout the system. This is despite me saying twice that it wouldn't happen. Why wouldn't it happen? Because you aren't turning hospitals into government functionaries. Hospitals and private insurers remain as they are under healthcare reform. People still have employer-sponsored health insurance. Employees of public and private hospitals are not government employees. None of that changes. Healthcare reform does not change any of it. Yet you seem to continue to think it will, and seem to continue to believe it will somehow 'socialise' medicine to give everyone access to healthcare.
You are Assuming Motive and do not Know that the Motive is to Produce Irrational and Unnecessary Fear.
Let's remove motive and look strictly at result. The end result of saying things like 'death panels' and 'socialism' has in fact elicited responses of fear and horror in people who have heard them. To date, none of the persons who have made the accusations of 'death panels' and 'socialism' have come forth and attempted to reassure people that there's no need for fear and/or horror. Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that the people who said 'death panels' and 'socialism' don't mind if people react with fear and/or horror. Regardless of what their motive may have been, they have not made any attempt to diminish the reactions their words have caused.
And might I at this point mention that in Arizona, because of budget cuts made by the GOP Governor Brewer, several people have died because of being denied coverage for transplants. Arizona democrats are trying to push legislation to restore that coverage. This would make it seem that the denial of coverage leading to death is actually in fact coming not from the democratic health care reform, but from the GOP itself, who has been screaming about the purported death panels of the democrats.
Ironic? Hypocritical? You mentioned that the 'death panels' are a Republican Concern. In the case of Arizona and GOP Governor Jan Brewer they appear to be a reality.
Basic Economics:
A company in Denmark has been building mega-ships.
These carry a big load of16,000 containers from China to the US...and return empty.
The sole cargo is goods for
WalMart. While this results in 'low cost' and increased sales..and maybe even a few new jobs at WalMart, it is basic two story outhouse in terms of
US employment. Only a downward spiral can result with first the consumer and then the businessman
cutting back. How will lower taxes on the wealthy
change this 'basic economics' and why if corporate profits are at an all time high are businessmen so timid?
A few of us avoid WalMart
and buy local. We find that customer service trumps price....
Salyavati,
It just So Happens that Time Delays is the Exact Complaint that has been Presented in Relation to the Nationalized Medicine in Canada and Our Experience with the VA gives Evidence that this Trend does not Only Occur in Canada, but can and has also Occurred in the US and Government Involvement is the Reason.
According to my "Find on this Page" Search Button, you have Only Spoken of the VA Once.
My Experience with the VA is Evidence that what has been Said about Government Health Care is Correct. Just because you have Said that "healthcare reform does NOT mean that a VA system would be put in place" does not Negate the Evidence that Government Involvement in Health Care can Result in Situations such as Occurs within both Canada and the VA, here in America, nor does Putting the Word NOT in Capital Letters, or even Bold Print.
Even if you had said this Twice, Repetition does not Change the Actual Strength or Weakness of an Argument.
Whose to say that Employers are going to Continue to Offer Health Insurance Once a Government Form of Insurance is in Place? Why Should they if it doesn't Seem Necessary any more?
Not all Fear is Irrational and the Absence of Fear can Lead to Carelessness in the Face of Danger. If there is a Cliff there, then Assuring People that there is no Reason to Fear would Result in Disaster.
I am a Moderate and Fully Admit that Extreme Republicanism is just as bad as Extreme Liberalism, thus the Results in Arizona of too many Budget Cuts in Health Care. One Wrong, though, does not Justify the Other.
Hi BB,
I did not Say that the Two Story Outhouse does not Exist. I just Said that Getting Rid of the Second Story (the Businessman) is not going to Create Jobs. What your example shows is that if we Only Pay Attention to the Consumer and Price Side of the Economy and not the Businessman and Cost Side of the Economy, then the Economy will Still Remain Broken.
Excessive Regulations and Taxes, though, are Part of the Exodus of Jobs Over Seas Problem. The Problem of Businesses Doing Business Over Seas rather than here is the States is a Problem that has not been Adequately Addressed in this Country.
"Only a downward spiral can result with first the consumer and then the businessman cutting back."
You have that Turned Around, BB. What Happens First is that the Consumer gets Laid Off, then the Spending is Decreased. The Lay Offs are the Result of the Businessman Cutting Back and Quite Often this is Caused by Excessive Government Regulations and Taxes. So the Actual Order is Government, Businessman and then Consumer.
Lower Taxes will Increase the Benefit and Decrease the Cost of Starting and Maintaining your Own Business. This is no Different than Increasing the Quality and Decreasing the Price of a Product so that Consumers will buy Products. Businessmen are Only Timid about Trying to do Business here in America where both the Taxes and the Regulations are High.
I don't Know. I guess it's Possible that my Rock Scientist Friend has not Taken an Economy Class. That Seems Odd, yet what I don't Get is why you do not Seem to Understand what I'm Talking about.
Changing who pays Columbia Presbyterian does not change who Columbia Presbyterian is.
See, these exact misconceptions are what has fueled all the horror over this entire issue.
Private hospitals are private hospitals. Public hospitals are public hospitals. Neither are VA hospitals, whose employees are government employees. To change payor structure does not change the payee.
It really doesn't matter what kind of argument I present, because the 'it maybe could be that this might possibly happen' argument can't ever be negated the way you present it. It maybe could be that it might possibly happen as I walk out the door to work this morning that the main support beam of our house collapses and kills me instantly, but that isn't going to stop me from getting dressed and heading off to work. That's called a risk/benefit ratio. Is the possibility that the LVL could collapse onto my head worth being so cautious that I stay home from work? Personally, no.
The fact is that half the country has effectually been without access to healthcare. The demographics are divided along class, financial, racial and ethnic lines. The haves would like the have-nots to stay that way. It's unAmerican to want your neighbour to be able to do everything you do and have everything you have. Just like the plight of the Irish during the potato famine was exacerbated by the English government's reaction to it, and how the African AIDS crisis is being utilized for political ends by the first-world, in America access to healthcare (and thus quality of life) is being used as a political tool in the furtherance of class division.
And speaking of the current tax cuts that have been extended. I am made to understand that cancelling these tax cuts would implode the economy, because the tax cuts will stimulate jobs and business. Am I mistaken in believing that these tax cuts have been around for ten years? I fail to see how they've created jobs and kept the economy strong, being that these are the same tax cuts that have been in place during the entire recession.
More political propaganda designed to make people 'cautious'. Oh, I'm sorry.. that's 'motive'. Let's look at results. More political propaganda that has resulted in people being cautious.
BB said: "and increased sales..and maybe even a few new jobs at WalMart,"
Actually Walmart is the biggest employer in the US. It's not a "few new jobs". And they hire more and more people over the long term. They have a very positive effect on the US labor situation. And they raise wages: the Walmart low-end clear wage is actually a little above the bare minimum wage paid by the "mom-and-pop" shops.
"A few of us avoid WalMart
and buy local. We find that customer service trumps price....
If you have a Walmart in your area and you go there, you are buying local. As for customer service, Walmart and Target and the others succeed largely through better customer service.
How do you serve the customers? By actually serving them. What I remember most like this was a time in a Minnesota town when I needed a piece of computer equipment. There were some small stores downtown that had it. But they were closed. There was a Target open, in fact for hours earlier than the other stores that remained closed until much later, too lazy to bother to try to sell me anything. So they got my business.
Snoozing and keeping the doors of the shop locked is very bad customer service.
BB, as for the rest of it, would you rather that Walmart only buy from suppliers that rip people off by overcharging for things? Or only from suppliers that mostly employee white people (instead of Mexicans or the still-feared Yellow Peril?). Yes, a large part of the fear of foreign people who sometimes are better at making things than Americans is racial.
-----------------
Lista said: "Excessive Regulations and Taxes, though, are Part of the Exodus of Jobs Over Seas Problem. The Problem of Businesses Doing Business Over Seas rather than here is the States is a Problem that has not been Adequately Addressed in this Country."
In Michigan, the unions are a major factor in forcing employers to leave the state and country.
I know of a nearby town with several industrial suppliers.
During the big economic downturn, orders were way down. At one company, they cut wages 15% across the board in order to survive. This company was able to make proper management decisions: there was no union. Later, wages went back up.
Another nearby factory was unionized. The union played a game of brinksmanship and forced the factory to close. They did not allow wages to be changed to a sustainable level.
Rock scientist?
...try explosives chemist/
initiator thermodynamics and ammunition. Economics classes teach theory and that theory holds in some
areas...in other areas, such as globalization, the theories are being changed.
Many of us with long managerial experience note
that over the last 30 years or so, the short-term bottom line took precedence (think Harvard Business School MBAs, for example); innovation, quality, customer, worker...all took a back seat to profit. Scientists, engineers, line workers were replaced by lawyers and accountants
and as we have seen, several big firms took the step of 'cooking the books'. It is a given that laying off employees raises your stock. So, when we speak of business and economics, we need keep in mind the vast difference between large
faceless corporations and
small businesses, between
producer business, manufacturing, retail,
service, banking. The various business niches
operate differently and affect our economy differently. Deregulating
banking, IMO, led to the
latest recession. Back to your original post..how about I agree that conservatives for the most part are not racist...and you agree I ain't Rock scientist? :)
Thanks for Commenting Dmarks. BB and Satyavati Commented again too, but I have Limited Time to Read and Post the Comments. I will get to them Later this Afternoon.
The problem with what Satyavati devi dasi is saying is that this disempowers people and removes market signals from the health care market. Regardless who runs it and how, it is still a market with consumers and providers.
Which makes more sense, having providers tailor their products and services to consumers' needs, or having government panels decide?
Clearly, the former is superior, since no entity or panel of experts can replicate a self-adjusting free market.
There was a time not long ago when poor people and uninsured people had babies and got service at hospitals. They paid their bill on an installment plan or saved up for predictable events like a birth.
The federal government entered in with a sincere desire to protect people, and ended up burying the market under tons of regulation. We have not had a free market medicine in over 40 years.
Dmarks is right, as usual. Businesses know no patriotism and they do not "care." They are in business to make money, and there's nothing wrong with that.
We get cell phones, computers and food all at a cheap price and conveniently because capitalists can make money doing it.
Manufacturers will go where they can make the best profit. If we here in the US would lower our corporate tax rate and streamline regulation, manufacturing would be booming.
One only needs to look at Michigan. They have bled out 70,000 jobs over the past 11 years. Where did they go? Overseas? Nope. They went south, where states help people not by taxation and nanny-state controls, but by creating a good business climate so people can take care of themselves. What a concept.
Great blog, Lista!
Sorry about the Delay in Getting some of these Comments Posted. Here they Finally are.
Satyavati,
The VA Hospital Bears a Similarity to the Socialized Medicine in Canada and therefore is Evidence that when Medicine is Controlled by the Government, Delays are Often the Result. Public Hospitals, that Primarily Serve the Poor, Exhibit the Same Problems as the VA and Canadian Health Care, so the Exact Model of VA Hospitals is not, in Actuality, the Focus of my Concern.
This is not a Misconception, Saty, I have Mentioned Three Situations in which the Problem of Delays Exist. This is Actual Real Evidence, not Fear.
What does the One who Gets Paid have to do with any of This? I'm Talking about the Quality of Service.
What I am Presenting is not just a "Maybe, Could Be", but Actual Real Evidence of Concern, as well as that the Risk/Benefit Ratio may be Tilted Against me in Relation to Health Care. If you don't Think so, then Show me the Evidence that Public Health Care does Exists that does not Result in the Delays that I'm Describing.
No One is Denying that there is a Serious Need for Health Care Reform. Republicans just Disagree with the Approach that the Democrats are Taking.
"In America, access to healthcare (and thus quality of life) is being used as a political tool in the furtherance of class division."
That is a Classic Example of Assumption of Motive and as to the Motive of Producing Caution, since when has "Caution" been a Bad Thing?
BB,
Lol. Did I say Rock Scientist? I Meant Rocket Scientist. That's sort of Funny. I Guess you very well Might Know something, though, about the Chemistry of Rocks. The Chemistry between a Man and a Women, Now that One's a Real Mystery. lol.
"Economics classes teach theory."
The Price (X)/Quantity Sold (Y)/Actual Profit (X+Y) Graphs are Based on Actual Observations and Observation is a Scientific Term. In this Graph, when the Price Goes Up, the Quantity Sold Goes Down. When the Price is too High, the Profit will Drop as Well, because the Sells are so Low.
The Supply (X)/Demand (Y)/Price (Forgot the Formula, but One is Devided by the Other.) Graphs are also Based on Observation. When Supply is Higher than Demand, the Price Goes Down. When Demand is Higher than Supply the Price Goes Up.
The Cost (X)/Benefit (Y)/Amount of Activity by Entrepreneurs Resulting in Revenue (Again I Forgot the Formula & what is Divided by What, but I do Understand the Principle.) Graph is just a Variation of the Other Two Mentioned (All of these are Based on Observation). This is the Graph that is Affected by Things such as Regulations and Taxes (Costs). When the Costs (Including Regulations and Taxes) Go Up, in Comparison to the Benefit, Entrepreneur Activity is Less and when the Cost (Including Regulations and Taxes) Goes down, in Comparison to Benefit, Entrepreneur Activity is More.
Entrepreneur Activity Includes the Starting of New and the Expanding of Old Businesses. Just as when the Price is too High, Sales Can Drop so Low that the Profits will also Drop, so also if the Cost of Doing Business is too High, the Entrepreneur Activity can Drop so Low that the Revenue will also Drop.
All of this is Basic Economics 101.
All I'm Saying is that I'm a Little Surprised if you have Never Studied this. I'm sure that you Must Have. Now, Tell me in a Basic Economics Sort of Way, what I'm Over Looking.
Lista,
Giving everyone accesss to health insurance is not 'socialising' or 'nationalising' health care.
Please understand this.
Giving everyone the opportunity to visit private physicians, receive treatment in private hospitals, and not have to worry about losing their homes and livelihoods as a result is not 'socialising' or 'nationalising' health care.
All the health care reform package has done is made health care insurance available to everyone, regardless of preexistings, and has made it illegal for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick.
None of this equals 'socialising' or 'nationalising' health care.
This is the error that people have continually made with this thing, and the misconception that's been fronted all along by opponents of the bill.
Making it financially possible for everyone to receive healthcare by making healthcare insurance available to them is not 'socialising' or 'nationalising' healthcare.
Let's please make this distinction clear. You keep going on and on about these fears and evidence and so on, but nothing in the healthcare reform bill creates a system of socialised medicine in the US.
Thanks.
I Want to Thank You Once Again, Dmarks, for Commenting and here is my Response to you.
The Jobs that have been Lost to Over Seas are Largely in the Area of Manufacturing and when Retailers Purchase these Over Sea Products, they are Contributing to the Lost Jobs Problem.
Mom and Pop Shops do have Better Service Dmarks. Walmart Succeeds more because of Price, not Service, and Specialty Shops, such as those that Sell Electronics, hire Employees that are More Knowledgeable about the Sold Specialty than any Typical Walmart Employee.
"As for the rest of it, would you rather that Walmart only buy from suppliers that rip people off by overcharging for things?"
It is More Expensive to Manufacture in the US and this is Largely due to the Unions. If it Costs more to "Buy American", then this is not because the Stores are Ripping People Off, but because the Unions are Ripping off the Stores by Asking for too much Money.
"Yes, a large part of the fear of foreign people who sometimes are better at making things than Americans is racial."
Let's not Make this into a Racial Issue, Dmarks. Foreign Products are Cheaper because the Labor is Cheaper. Don't you see? You can not Assume the Motives of those who Purchase Products and Call it Racism. That is nothing more than Speculation and there is no way to Prove it.
I didn't Realize when I Invited you to my Blog, that I was Going to End Up Disagreeing with so much of what you said. :) I did Like what you Said about Unions, though, cause that is so True.
In this Past Election, the Only Real Difference Between the Liberal Candidate for Governor in California and the RINO that was Running Against him was that the RINO was Harder on Unions. A lot of my Friends didn't Want to Vote for the RINO Republican and Voted for a Third Party Candidate Instead, but I thought that the Union Issue was an Important One, so I Voted for the RINO in Order to Defeat the Union Loving Democrat.
Unfortunately, the Democrat, Jerry Brown, Won Anyway.
Satyavati,
Republicans are Concerned about the MOVEMENT TOWARDS Socialism. Is this Fear Irrational? Well, it Depends on who you Talk to.
Republicans are also Concerned that the Insurance Offered by the Government is going to Put the Private Health Insurance Companies Out of Business and if this Happens, Government Health Insurance will be all that's Left. Is this Fear Irrational? Well, Again, it Depends on who you Talk to.
"All the health care reform package has done is made health care insurance available to everyone, regardless of preexistings, and has made it illegal for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick."
And all you have done is Listed that which is Positive in the Program and that which Republicans also Agree with, yet Unfortunately this is NOT "ALL the Health Care Reform Package has done."
The Distinction that I'd Like to Make Clear is that Republicans are Concerned about the MOVEMENT TOWARDS Socializing and Nationalizing Health Care along with whatever else. And Once Again, Caution is a Positive, not a Negative.
Well, I sure am Glad that I Checked the Comment Moderation Page because for Some Reason Silverfiddle's Comments were not Sent to my Email Box. Everyone, Please do Check Out the Comment that Silverfiddle Wrote on the 8th, that I Posted Late. Sorry about that my Silver Friend.
Thanks for Dropping By, Silverfiddle. It is so Nice to Get some Thoughts from the Other Perspective and Thanks for the Complement. I Like your Blog too.
Unfortunately, a lot of Insurance Companies Already Make a lot of the Decisions for Patients, yet that which Involves Government is Worse, such as the VA and now that I Think of it, also Workman's Comp.
The Market has a Tendency to Force Providers to Provide "that which Sells", thus the Customers are the Actual Ones who Decide what it is that the Providers Sell. They Can not Actually do anything they want to at any Price because not Everything Sells.
The One Draw Back is that Life Saving Medicine is not something that a Person can Decide not to Buy, so the Consumer has a Little Less Control Over this than Over Other Items that are Optional. That is the Other Side of the Issue, yet there is a Limit to the Amount of Involvement that the Government should Impose.
Your Second Comment is Great!! Yes!! That is just the Sort of Comment I was Looking for because I Forget Which States are doing What, though I do Know that what you have Described has been Occurring all along.
Lista,
If we let every possibility, every fear, every step terrify us with perceived 'risks' we might just not as well take any steps at all ever.
Progress is about risk. You cannot proceed forward without taking some kind of risk.
To let the possibility of risk paralyse us is effectual suicide.
Fear ("concern") can be used as a weapon and a tool, Lista. I'm not saying it is. I'm saying it can be, and that it can be used to prevent reasonable progress.
Like I said before, that LVL might fall on my head this morning, or my car might possibly suddenly and without warning explode into a million pieces when I sit in it, but I'm still going to work.
And as far as the south being hospitable to businesses? (???) I live in the south. What you're referring to is the plantation mentality so pervasive here, in which workers have little to none.
Lista said:
"The Jobs that have been Lost to Over Seas are Largely in the Area of Manufacturing and when Retailers Purchase these Over Sea Products, they are Contributing to the Lost Jobs Problem."
If the big box retailers don't give people better deals, people will order directly themselves and bypass those who choose to sell overpriced goods.
"Mom and Pop Shops do have Better Service Dmarks. Walmart Succeeds more because of Price, not Service"
They succeed due to both. Again, it is lousy customer service if you are too lazy to unlock your shop's door.
"and Specialty Shops, such as those that Sell Electronics, hire Employees that are More Knowledgeable about the Sold Specialty than any Typical Walmart Employee."
True. For both places you can get the best information online.
"It is More Expensive to Manufacture in the US and this is Largely due to the Unions."
Well, we agree on this. But it is only part of the situation.
"Let's not Make this into a Racial Issue, Dmarks. Foreign Products are Cheaper because the Labor is Cheaper."
I hear a lot of racial assumptions in many arguments against free-and-fair trade. Most often about Mexicans. Not that you are making them yourself, but so many do, including columnist Pat Buchanan.
Tell me what the US top trading partner is. It's CANADA. The top list also includes France, German, and England. Yet no one ever complains about these places. It's the places with 'different' people like Mexico, S. Korea, Janan, and China that get all the complaints from those who want to restrict trade.
Satyavati,
"If we let every possibility, every fear, every step terrify us with perceived 'risks', we might just not as well take any steps at all ever."
This is True when there is no Evidence, but there is Evidence and by this, I mean Evidence that Government Involvement Creates Delays and Inefficiency. The Evidence is in the Health Care of Canada, the VA, Public Hospitals for the Poor here in the US, and Also Workman's Comp. The Evidence of this is all over the Place.
Progress should never be Sought without the Evaluation of the Risks. To do so is Careless and Foolish.
Besides, I do not Think that People are really so "Terrified". That is an Exaggeration.
Not all Fear is Irrational and not all Concern is a "Weapon". That is the Assumption of Motive and it is a False Assumption.
Just as Things such as Racism can be Based on False Assumptions, so also the Accusation of Things such as Racism and "Fear Tactics" can also be Based on False Assumptions about the Motives of Others.
You say that the Fears are not Reasonable and I say that they are Reasonable and that is the Core of our Disagreement. Accusations of "Fear Tactics", though, is not going to Cause me to Change my Mind about it.
If you saw some Actual Real Evidence that your LVL was about Ready to Fall on your Head or that a Bomb had been Placed in your Car, then it Might be a Good Idea to Fix it, rather than Ignoring the Problem.
South of Michigan is Indiana and Ohio. Silverfiddle did not Specify the Exact States that he was Referring to that Businesses were Fleeing too, yet I have heard this Argument Before.
Sat said:
"And as far as the south being hospitable to businesses? (???) I live in the south. What you're referring to is the plantation mentality so pervasive here, in which workers have little to none."
No, it is a situation where workers aren't bullied into joining unions as much, and as such get a fair wage.
Sorry, the plantations are long gone.
Hi Dmarks,
Oh My!! I'll be Back Later to Respond to the First Comment you Posted Today. I Agree with the Shorter One that was in Response to Satyvati.
There was a Time in which Businesses had too much Power and the Unions were Needed, but the Tables have been Turned and now the Unions are the Ones with too much Power.
Dmarks
"overpriced goods"
If the Market will Bear it, then it is not Over Priced. The Only Time when Price Gouging Really Occurs is on Products that are Necessities, that People can not Decide not to Buy.
On the Issue of the Service of Walmart vs. Family Stores, I Still Disagree.
"For both places you can get the best information online."
Yes, but it is Nice to Talk to a Real Live Person Once in awhile.
National Trade is not my Area of Expertize, so I'm just going to Leave that one Alone for now.
Say. Let's Move this Conversation to the Next Post. I'm always Thinking that Long Comment Threads are not as Likely to be Read Later.
I liked this thread!
...and you went and closed it :(
..well bummer darn. :)
Well, Perhaps after the Thanksgiving Weekend is over with, I'll come Back and Read this Thread again to see what you are Talking about and then Decide what to do with it. Either Start a New Thread, or Continue Talking on this One. I Wonder at exactly what Point a Comment Thread is Still Short Enough that New Comers will Still Read it and at What Point it has become Long Enough that People will No Longer Take the Time. There is no way for me to really Know the Answer to such a Question.
Unfortunately, this hasn't been the Post that Gets the Web Hits as much as the Other Two False Assumption Posts. I'm not sure why. See the January, 2011 Archive to the Right.
Post a Comment