Soback

It's his trademark, when it comes time to argue facts, it's either insult time or dissapearance time.

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article334668.ece "A proposed tough new security bill makes it an offence, punishable by up to two years jail, to even train people to take part in street protests, a clause that appears intended to crack down on the sort of youth movements that were so prominent in the revolutions in Georgia and in Ukraine. The loose wording of the bill means it could be used to jail anyone who has uttered any criticism of the president, for instance, or of the political, economic, or social state of the country. Stepan Sukhorenko, the head of the KGB, as the Belarussian security service is still known, has already publicly accused two youth groups, the Youth Front and Zubr, of using foreign help to form their organisational core and prepare the ground for mass protests. Determined to head off an "orange" - or any other colour - revolution, he said that Belarus had to defend itself against unprecedented pressure from abroad, in particular from the United States. He promised that the country's security services would prevent any disruption of the elections. Journalists are also in Mr Lukashenko's firing line. The legislation makes it an offence to call on foreign states, or organisations, to take measures detrimental to Belarus - even to publicise such appeals. The European Union has been standing by helplessly as Belarus' 10 million people fall further outside the democratic orbit. Except for a condemnation of "the systematic and increasing repression of civil society and the political opposition and the independent media", the British-led EU presidency has been virtually silent on the country's slide into totalitarianism. " ---I came from Belarussia, Minsk. This is what SOCIALISM IS. Would anyone want to live there? Do you know why EU is silent. Because their government is the same Social scum that rules Belarussia, why would one scumbag critisize another and just draw attention to their own system and where it leads a decade from now. Critisizing Belarussia is like critisizing themselfs in the future. That's why they are silent, while the normal people living under this Socialist state, live like slaves. Oh, and anyone that tries to reply how Socialism in Europe is different because it's ellected, go back and read the article, socialism in Belarussia is elected too. Sadam was elected. Makes you wonder. That's why liberalism is a mental disorder, look where it got those people, that's your future EU.

http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-4-6/27628.html Welcome to Socialism. Hey you gotta remember. Polls, earlier this year showed that Europeans like China better than US. ROFL "The China Information Center in the U.S. quoted some hospital personnel who disclosed that taking kidneys and livers from executed prisoners for use in transplantation has always been an ÔÇ£open secretÔÇØ within the hospital. If the hospitals depended solely on voluntary organ donations and did not obtain organs from prisoners, the number of organs available for transplant would fall far short of the demand. Although Chinese law prohibits transplanting organs from condemned prisoners, the report says that the hospitals work in tandem with the local judicial departments. In recent years, relatives of some executed prisoners have been suing the hospitals for illegal use of their relativeÔÇÖs organs. In June 2001, Wang Guoqi, a doctor at the Burn Unit of the Tianjin Paramilitary Police General Brigade Hospital before moving to the U.S., testified before Congress that he had removed corneas and skin from recently executed prisoners on at least 100 occasions. He said that he had also witnessed other doctors from the hospital selecting organs from prisonerÔÇÖs bodies and later selling them for profit. Afterwards, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that Dr. WangÔÇÖs testimony slandered China. Nevertheless, a series of facts has proven that some of the organs transplanted in China were indeed taken from recently executed prisoners. Zeng Xianzi, a wealthy Hong Kong merchant and member of the Standing Committee of the National PeopleÔÇÖs Congress, received a kidney transplant six years ago at the Guangzhou Zhongshan UniversityÔÇÖs first hospital. The kidney that he received was taken from the body of an executed prisoner ÔÇö but for ÔÇ£sensitive political reasons,ÔÇØ nobody dared to make the public aware of this incident Last September, Fu Biao, a renowned actor in Mainland China, underwent a successful liver transplant ÔÇô the liver he received was from the body of an executed Shandong prisoner. The Laogai Research Foundation in the U.S. noted that while the transplant was successful, nobody in China questioned the legality of removing the liver without consent."

Force, physical, intimidation, anything were you FORCE someone AGAINST their free will. Don't confuse power with influence. People can trade favors, like you do something now, and I do something later, it benefits both parties. It's when you do something for me, or I will black list you and nobody will deal with you that is force. You get the idea, when you co-erce, by whichever means, force someone to do something they do not want to do. Like I said, with money you can of course hire thugs to do your bidding, but you can also be a thug and call on your friends to do the same thing. Money doesn't automatically give you power, however it automatically gives you freedom, it buys you time to pursue your interests. It frees you up from tasks that you can pay someone else to do for you, and frees up your time for something else. Kinda like the man that invented central heating/conditioning. Before you would have to go outside, gather wood, chop it up, stock the fireplace, light a fire and keep stocking it. That saved you HOURS, the only thing you need is money to pay for equipment (heater) and supplies (gas). Without money you would still be collecting wood. You see how that mans invention + your money bought you freedom from those tasks. In return, another man invented a car. And that bought you and the man who invented a gas heater, time. Now you can go to the store and come back in 20 minutes as opposed to 3 hours. All they asked in return is money from you, for their mental labors, but what they got is way more than that, they bought themselfs TIME so that they could pursue other interests that are worthwile, like inventing more things. That money didn't make them powerfull, didn't do anything but gotten them FREEDOM. It's the same people that say money is evil that say money is power. Let me ask you, if money is power, and power can be evil, that means money is evil. That's why you hear sayings like, money is the root of all evil. Why then Indians were skinning each others heads, and hacking neighboring tribes to pieces if they didn't even have a concept of money. Why were African tribes constantly warring with each other, they had no concept of money either. It makes as much sence as when, mostly the same people, say things like guns kill people. Guns kill people, just like money is the root of all evil. People kill people, bad people kill people, just like bad people are the root of all evil, NOT money. You don't need money to be evil, as a matter of fact, a lot of evil is done by people who do not have ANY money. Like thugs who rob you to get money, or just because. Or like leeches that rob you to feed themselfs, or rather have the government rob you for them. However, didn't the the inventor who recieved money for his invention, used that money to buy food, to buy a home, to buy necessities and luxuries, and most importantly time free from labor so that he could concentrate and spend that time to pursue other inventions? Didn't the industialist that build a factory that makes cars, use that money to buy himself time free from mundane labor (hire others for it), so that he could better his factory, build new ones and better his product (don't forget, the more he builds, the more people get to WORK for him, the more people work, the better their life becomes). None of those men are powerfull. If they met you on the street, you wouldn't even know who they are. All of them are free in their lives. They can pick up and go to Hawaii or Caribean at moments wish, they are FREE to do that, you are not. Why, because they have money to BUY that FREEDOM, you do not. And if they WORK on their bussinesses, they will continue having money (a LOT of people that inherit their fortune and don't spend time managing it themselfs, LOSE it), if you continue to allow others to take money that YOU earn, you are therefore allowing them to take YOUR FREEDOM away from you, and you continue allowing others to subjugate you like that, to leech off of you, off of your labor, if you continue letting yourself be a slave that works for another, you will NEVER be FREE.

I guess you convinently missed the point that having money doesn't mean having power to FORCE someones hand. While having POWER means you CAN force someone. Hey, I posted a long paragraph, with examples and explanations. It was your job to read and comprehend it. I can't digest it for you, you have to do that on your own. I'll tell you again. Money doesn't equal power. It equals freedom. For examples as to why, it's all in my earlier post. Also, don't forget, you live in a country where people are taught from day one, told directly and indirectly, that money is power and therefore is evil, and it's best that only few select have it, because they know how to use it responsibly to protect you from evil. I already explained why they want you to think that way, that once the money = power link is made, it's not hard to give you examples how power is evil as those who have it can FORCE people. Money CAN NOT FORCE people, if you offer someone A BILLION dollars they WILL NOT cut off their head, as then they would have no use for that billion dollars. Of course you can hire people to do criminal acts, and force others, but you can also do that without money. Money is freedom because like it was explained in previous posts, it's work in stored format. The most important commodity it can buy you is time, time you don't have to spend to build a house (have someone do that work for you), grocery shopping, any kind of labor or product, so that you are FREE to pursue whatever it is you want. Could you be free to do all those things without money, sure, if you lived for 1000 years, you could build your own house, do every single chore yourself, and then whatever time you had left over, you could pursue what you actually wanted. Do you understand now that money is freedom instead of power? Do you understand that money can not force someone to act against their will? Do you understand that money can BUY you power, but it does not EQUAL power, just like money can buy you a house, but it does not equal a house, aftera all, if a person absolutly does not want to sell his house, no ammount of money will get you that home. The ONLY reason why you are taught that money is power, is to make the evil link, so that you could be content and not question why only the politicians in a socialist society have money, YOUR money, and why they are the ones who get to have their dachas (private country homes), and why they are the ones who get to drive their Benzes, all bought with YOUR money.

ROFL, he just doesn't get it. Literally doesn't get it. This vacinations thread, the global warming threads, the CO2 emissions threads, the Socialism threads. He doesn't get ANY of them. In the begining we thought that he knew things because of the way he presented them, then we started catching on, now we just know better. The guy has no original ideas, nor it seems like he can back up the material he presents by HIS OWN REASONING. It's like he throws some links out there, and when people counter his material with published information and then REASON and EXPLAIN to him why the material he presented is wrong, like viruses mutation probabilities are endless and the particular posibility he speaks of is one out of trillions that it's like picking out one particular sand granule out of the whole beach, like not being able to vacinate 100% of worlds population, like vacinations becoming useless as soon as the virus mutates again, he doesn't even see the fact that 70 people dying in TWO YEARS TIME is less than the number that die from regular flu or should we clarify that the numbers that die from regular flu actually die from something else once their imune system is weakened by flu, how many of those 70 died from something else once their imune system was weakened? Well, at least we all know better now than to take him seriously. ROFL. I tell people that liberalism/socialism is a mental disorder, why are we surprised then that all the subjects like global warming, feed world hunger, money for everyone, this virus killing everyone and other BS comes out from socialist countries, their only aim being to loot money from others, to subjugate others, to get them under their "best for the society" agenda where individual rights don't exist and you are nothing more than a slave. We see the thinking of people from those countries on these boards, we see how they think and what they know, and we also see what Socialism has to offer us. After all that, how can we ever take Socialism seriously. LOL

Yes it did. USSR = direct translation would be CCCP (in Russian) or SSSR (in Englidh), but anyway the first S = Soviet, second S = Union (word union starts with an S in Russian), S = Socialist, R = Republic. Soviet Union of Socialist Republics. ROFL, now the cancer spread to Peoples Republic of China and United Socialist Republics of Europe.

Really, what holiday rolls around EVERY YEAR, THIS time of year. It's not Hannukah, it's not any pagan holiday, it's not any muslim holiday, it's CHRISTMAS. What holiday has a tree with decorations? It's NOT any other holiday, so therefore it's NOT a holiday tree, it's CHRISTMAS tree. So stop calling a Christmas tree a holiday tree. It's like saying that a spoon is a fork. It doesn't make sense. The reason people are NOT saying Merry Christmas at work places, at stores, and the reason they are NOT calling a Christmas tree by IT'S TRUE NAME, A CHRISTMAS TREE, is because the liberals have gotten the employers so afraid of getting sued for discrimination that political correctness has rotten their brains. Everything needs to be watered down and everything needs to be run by the lawyers as to come up with the name for Christmas and Christmas tree as to still be able to celebrate it, but at the same time NOT to be sued by ACLU and other scum. So the name was born, Holiday tree. Lets call the Menorah a holiday candle holder. Lets call the Qur'an a past time recreational book, calling it a religious book will offend Jews and Christians. And we don't want to offend anyone do we? I don't see Conservatives suing anyone because they sell Menorah under the name Menorah. Do you? The only people I see medling in other peoples affairs all the time are liberals. That's what creates so much chaos. They have to stick their stupid heads into every persons life and tell them how to live it. If they would only let people live their lives, celebrate their holidays, everything would be fine. But no, word Christmas will offend Jews and Muslims. Word Hannukah will offend Christians and Muslims. Word Ramadan will offend Jews and Chsristians. So we are going to tell everyone to just call everything Holidays. If they would just stay out, and leave people be, everything would be FINE. Christians would celebreate Christmas, Muslims would celebrate Ramadan, and Jews would celebreate Hunnukah. And others would celebrate whatever they want. It's JUST like the argument about race. He is black, he is white, he is yellow. So we have to be politically correct and call him an Asian American, and the other guy is Sout American , or Mexican American, and black is not black but African American. They are driving people NUTS. Nobody CARES if you are black, white, yellow, green. The ONLY thing liberals do with this crap is have people ARGUE all the time, instead of just being people and going along living their lives. [ 12-18-2005, 07:08 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

What danger to society would that be Nomad? Because you know, a lot of people went to Syberia because they were a danger to society. You sound JUST LIKE STALIN, and he sounded JUST LIKE HITLER. Have you missed my post about how even if you could make vacinations for everyone, as soon as that virus mutates, those vacinations are USELESS, and even if they could make a new vacine for the new virus in thime (which they can't), and even if they could manufacture the new vacine for everyone (which they also can't), it would be more than enough time for the virus to mutate again to start the chasing cycle all over again. I thought you believe in evolution, then why are you trying to stop it? The rights of society ends when it infringes on my rights. My rights to freedom, my rights to my property, and my rights to pursuit of happiness without violating anyone elses. Oh, and if the Spanish flew killed 20 to 40 million people, but had a lethality rate of 5%, why don't you do the math and say how many people were infected. The big number of 20 million means NOTHING when you realize the rate of infection. Don't try to confuse some who might be easily impressed by numbers with words millions attached to them, God knows we have enough of panicky "sky is falling because illegals are dying from thirst crossing the desert, so install water fountains" types here.

If by change you mean disregarding the VERY holiday those people are shopping for then yes, all the NORMAL people wouldn't like that. What holiday would you be refering to when you say Happy Holidays? Would that be the Jewish holiday? Or would that be the made up holiday. If you can't name those two, then you don't even know what that change is. How about the Christmas tree. Is that a holiday tree? Does that said Jewish holiday have a tree with decorations on it? How about the made up one? So how does a Christmas tree become a holiday tree? You call that change. Some would call it for what it is, screwed up political correctness. Let me give you a little lesson. In Russia, Communists destroyed Christmas, they made religion illegal. That in turn destroyed tightly knit communities, that destroyed family and then people became property of the state. The state told them where to live (assigning living appartments), the state told them how to live (they judged how big an apartment a family would need), and how to raise their kids. Tell me that at least one of those things is not happening in US with prolifiration of Socialism. Didn't Hillary say it takes a village to raise a child? Have fun without Christmas, by the end of your life, you probably won't even know what the word Holidays mean, as your kids will be toiling away 365 days a year to support Hillarys and Kennedys offsprings, the few select that will have money, because money is evil and only they should have it, to protect you from evil.

You mean nobody had to pay for it? You mean the Cubans that work don't have to pay for those doctors? Really, so the doctors that recieve government paychecks, those same paychecks are not collected through taxes? So now that those Cubans are paying taxes to the government, and the government paying the doctors through those taxes, and those doctors are spending their time, countrys medical supplies and other medical resources to provide medical care for people WHO DO NOT EVEN LIVE IN CUBA. If I was a Cuban citizen I would be PISSED that I the doctor I AM PAYING is not working to better the life of another Cuban, but is instead working for the presidents publicity stunt. But then again, we do know that people are leaving Cuba EVERY DAY, and ANY WAY they can, haven't you heard of them crowding into a boat and casting off, hoping to make it ANYWHERE but Cuba, it's gotta be pretty bad if one is ready to take his chances starving, drowning or dying of thirst rather than live in Cuba. Kinda like in China, once all the options are up, one would prefer to take his life rather than spend his days like a slave. ROFL. And Aperson, why don't you learn about Rome before you speak how one that knows history can fit it to his views. You don't even know Bread and Circuses saying, and how Roman parlament was looting the nation to keep the unrests down. Why do you think there were so many rebellions in Roman Empire towards the end of it's days, for kicks and gigles?

ROFL, yeah I know. It's like the whole discussion about the working people paying for everyone else and how it's the same as slavery hasn't even taken place. AND on top of it. I KNOW people from Canada, and they talk about Canada's medical system with COMPLETE disgust. They teld me stories of how it takes 6 months to 2 YEARS to get treatment for cancer. If you need aditional diagnosis done, they will put you in line and most of the time you end up waiting 8 months. While they have a SPECIAL LINE for select people that get completly different treatment from the rest of the population, the funnies thing is, the rest of the population PAYS for their care too (hey, just like in mother Russia, ROFL, welcome communism). So not only are the leeches riding on the back of taxpayers, forcing them to pay for everything starting from food and housing ending with medical care and retirement, but the select "people in high places, their friends, ect..." get a free ride on taxpayers money too, Socialism is great isn't it, err, I meant to clarify, socialism is great for those who BENEFIT, those who can't take care of themselfs, those who have nothing of value to offer, and those who get rich off of the system. I interact with a lot of people in my line of work, have been since 20. Most of those people are millionares, some are billionares. I talk, learn from them. Over 80% are conservative, the remainder are in the middle, and only a few are bleeding socialists. Those said liberal socialists fall into two basic catergories, some are politicians that get paid from the government and the ONLY way they can increase their pay is to give more to the poor what they loot from the rest, and the others are the ones that have inherited their family fortune, bussinesses, ect...BUT they haven't worked a day in their life, even at managing their own money, so they have NO IDEA what money is and obviously think that everyone should have some, and won't understand why others don't have it, even to save their life. The BEST people I've men, and they fall into majority are venture capitalists. Those are awesome. They are smart and intelligent, not to mention work pretty much 24/7. You see, every able bodied man with at least average dexterity can perform manual labor, not every man however, even educated man, can do what those guys do. Venture capitalists are the REASON our country runs, and socialist countries collapse. US fosters conditions for these venture capitalists to thrive and prosper, to invest in ideas that might pay off big or might go bust, to open bussinesses, and to OPERATE those bussineses, because like I said, a monkey can fly a space shuttle once taught to push buttons when they light up, it takes a GENIUS to INVENT AND DESIGN that space shuttle and it takes another GENIUS to conclude that the idea is profitable and INVEST in that space shuttle, if they weren't geniuses, they would end up losing all their investment capital in a blink of an eye. So, what happens when socialism fosters conditions in which those people decide that their investments and labor is not worth the risk and time spent? They either LEAVE to another country or they TAKE THEIR MONEY and RETIRE, move to mexico and sip margaritas till the end of their days. In BOTH cases, who loses? YOU DO. What's the most important commondity on earth? Time. Before someone invented that automatic milking machine, a manual worker had to sit and milk each cow, that would take time and labor, milk wasn't plentiful and it was expensive. When the inventor introduced that machine, it benefited EVERYONE, starting from the farmer and ending with the consumer. That invention freed up 20minutes per cow, imagine the immense ammount of time saved so that you could devote it to something else. How about the printing press, the clothe weaver, pretty much ANY invention saves you time, or is a better way of doing things. That's why today, you have time to go to school instead of working all day helping your dad at the farm, you can watch tv, instead of helping your mother wash dishes/clothes and then spend half a day ironing them. That's why you have time to spend with your family instead of feeding your horses and cleaning them for the next day of travel. How about the store owner that decided to open up his shop not too far away from your house because he decided to take a risk with his money and labor in hopes that it will pay off, how much time shopping did he save you then? It would be a terrifying day when those people decide that the return will not be worth their investment because of government regulation and taxation, or they plain out retire or quit working as they get tired of all the bs. It happened before, those time were known as the dark ages and lasted almost TWO THOUSAND years. The inventions were lost, the knowledge was lost. To prove it, just go research what technology Rome had, what technology the Greeks had, what were the inventions of Archemidies, Leonardo. Once those people disseared, those who could only do manual labor were reduced to nothing more than manual labor, and had to spend a week just to make themsefs a pair of shoes. You want to live like that again? Listen to Nomad. The ONLY right thing that came out from him in these forums is when he said what a disaster would happen to our society if even 5% of SKILLED people will not be in the equation. Well, the virus is a maybe for that scenario, however, socialism is A FACT and it's NOW that it's accomplishing the very same thing a virus would, albeit at a little slower pace. [ 12-17-2005, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

Guess what Nomad. The same societal melt down WILL occur eventually, just like it HAS occured before, time after time. If it doesn't occur because of a virus, it will occur because of socialism. Just like you said, once you take even 5 or 10 percent of skilled people out of society, the whole structure will crumble. What do you think happened in Russia? Exactly that, the skilled professors, inventors, top people you would call executives this day, they ALL refused to work, LOL, because the return on their labor wasn't worth it, A LOT of them immigrated to Europe and America. What do you think will happen as you continue taxing the skilled people of today. Eventually, just like it says in the Declaration of Independence, "accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. ", which means that the day will come when the price for refusing to work will be the same as working. The more skilled people wake up and understand their value, the more dangerous to Socialism they become, LOL, so it's only a matter of time, as you can not have an ignorant intelligent person. By the way, what's the matter Nomad, you seem to really take it personaly, you know, the whole 5 to 10% of SKILLED people taken out of society. Worrying about the survival of the leeches? As you know they would be the FIRST ones to go once tough gets going. Oh and as far as that virus mutating, guess what, it's like playing the lotto. Vaccinations DO NOT HELP. Even if you design a vaccine agains one strain, as soon as it mutates, that vaccine becomes USELESS, and even if you could design the new vaccine within a week (which is impossible), and even if you could make enough for everyone in the whole world within a month (which is impossible too), not only is one month and one week more than enough time for the virus to mutate again, but YOU CAN NOT pop toxic vacines into people month after month, that alone would kill them. So just like the black plague, so is every disease, a part of evolution.

http://www.wisinfo.com/postcrescent/news/a..._19478596.shtml "The Wisconsin Hospital Association estimates that commercial insurersÔÇÖ hospital costs increase about 15 percent because of the shortfall in Medicare reimbursements. While the new recommendation will help ease the federal deficit, it will do so on the backs of taxpayers who are already struggling with rising health insurance premiums and costs." ---> So not only do we ALREADY pay for their medicare through our taxes, we ALSO pay to make up the difference by having higher costs for our OWN insurance. Remember that little law the government passed, the one that states that hospitals HAVE to provide care, regardless if they get paid or not. Well guess what, WE, the taxpayers, the WORKING people end up picking up the costs, first the government takes money away from us directly, and a portion of it goes to medical coverage for the poor (mind the beurocratic waste, less than 35cents on the dollar actually makes it after the government is done with it), THEN on top of it, when even that money is not enough and the budget for medicare falls short of the hospital bills, hospitals charge more to insurance companies (we pay the primiums of course) and charges more to those who get admitted without insurance, those people are at the REAL disadvantage, as they probably work and have some money, thus could not qualify for medicare, but at the same time are so poor that they can not spend $200 bucks a month on health insurance. Once they get the bill and the collection procedures start, they really end up in the gutter, all because of the leeches that drove up up the prices in the first place. How upset would you be if you were working, making practically nothing, shelling out couple of thousand a year in taxes to support the leeches, so that they could have food, housing, and health coverage, and when YOU get sick or get into an accident, you end up losing EVERYTHING you have worked so hard for. Yeah, that sounds really moral doesn't it. Bankrupting and ruining a hard working human beings life is more moral than turning away a leech that DEMANDS his ENTITLEMENT to health care at the cost to that hard working man. [ 12-16-2005, 09:36 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

So, no insults Nomad? Really? As far as you forcing others to take vacines, it just shows the liberal mindset of control over others, of treating people like stock animals, like they have no mind of their own, and shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices. You should know, that those who get vacinated will be IN NO DANGER from those who do not get vacinated and MAYBE get sick. Not to mention how HIGHLY INEFECTIVE vacines are against easily mutatable viruses such as flu. Who are you to decide what I do with my body? Who are you to decide how I raise my kids? As far as that great epidemic you are talking about. Just to let you know my own opinion. I wouldn't mind it too much. Just like after the great plague, there were people that were immune to the virus and survived. Our society shed the leeches, and when people migrated, those who survived were in a great position to created a clean society of the strong, the self sufficient, the productive, they finally were free and didn't have to feed and support all the "disadvantaged". It's evolution at it's best.

Let me clarify as to your next question as how would the hospital differentiate between an illegal or an American citizen. The answer is, they wouldn't have to. The option would be, either pay or leave and go to charity funded hospital. If a charity funded hospital doesn't ask for any government issued ID and don't mind treating illegals and having less money left over to treat American citizens that would relly on charity, that's their decission, and I am sure there would be charity hospitals that would advertise "We ASK for government ID to make sure you donations benefit OUR CITIZENS", and those would take in the most dontaions.

Not treating illegals is immoral? So, me having to pick up the bill for their treatments is not immoral? Here I am, working, earning money, and then have a portion of that money taken away and go towards treating someone that violated this countrys laws by crossing the border ILLEGALLY, that's not immoral huh? I thought we just had this whole discussion how when you take money away from the person that worked for them, it's therefore HIS LABOR that you are taking away. And when you spend his labor on things that do not benefit him, you are therefore enslaving him to the people you spend his labor on. You forcefully, without his concent, make him WORK for those peoples medical care (in this case). Why are you justifying slavery? And you missed the point. NO American should have a health identification card. NO American should pay for his fellow Americans health care. If you would get rid of the law that states that hospitals HAVE to treat illegals, and if you also get rid of government subsidized medical care, the prices be it private insurance or out of pocket expenses WILL drop as to be affordable for average working American. Those who do not work and therefore do not make money should then depend on good will of the people, aka CHARITY, as it should be. They should NOT be entitled to the products of others labor (aka money), without other peoples consent of giving it to them. Otherwise it's called looting.

The prices for our healthcare have been drastically inflated by government and illegals. Here's how: When a person that does not have medical insurance, mostly illegals because they do not have a job that gives them medical, nor do they bother to buy medical insurance, walk into a hospital. The hospital CAN NOT deny them care. However, they can recieve treatment, and WALK OUT from that hospital without paying. What do you think happens when a normal American walks in, be it with insurance or without? Now the hospital has to make up the losses incurred, and therefore will charge MORE for their products/services. So they charge an obsene ammount either to his insurane provider, or if he doesn't have any, well guess what, an American citizen has a social security number, and they will be suing him to collect. So the American citizen not only ends up paying for food stamps and wellfare, but also for medical care for himself and illegals. Great isn't it. Second. Here's how it's inflated by the government. A guy I know actually had personal experience with this one. I'll tell his story at the end. When the government starts paying for medical as one of it's social programs, hospitals can charge whatever they want and get away with it. Government pretty much NEVER questions the bills (unlike a private insurance company, that would check and double check to make sure they are getting charged fairly). So the hospital can charge them $300 bucks for a band aid. Yes, that's right, a band aid. So what happens to the prices then? Well, they get inflated. So now American citizen is paying for the illgelas that hospitals can never collect from, then they are also paying the prices that have been inflated on top of that by government "insurance". Really great huh. Hospitals are privately run, and over a dozen of them closed in California last year because they simply could not function with all the losses they incurred because of the illegals getting treated, and other people they can't collect from. Yet they have to follow government mandated law that says you can not refuse service to anyone. So the normal working people end up suffering the high, inflated prices, the poorer quality of care, and less hospitals all around. Here's the story about that guy. He showed up for his appointment to get his toe wound checked. The doc looked at it, the nurse cleaned it. They slapped some medicine and a band aid on it and set him free. Later on the bill shows up for OVER $3500. He went back to the hospital to dispute the charges, as all it was is a 15 minute visit, medicine, and a band aid. When they gave him an itemized list, he saved it for laughs (that's how I know this story, I saw the list). They were charging him hundreds of dollars for a band aid, over a thousand for 5 minutes the doc spend with him, and over a thousand for the 10 minutes the nurse cleaned it and wraped it, so the medicine and band aid came to a little over a thousand too. So the guy asked to see the supervise, and went all the way up to the guy managing the hospital. Once he did that, the whole bill was dropped to a little over $400 bucks. Yeah, you are right, our medical care is screwed up. But not the way you say it is. Our medical care is screwed up by the illegals and by government medling. Whenever government puts their paws into something, the whole operation goes to *insert*. It's ALWAYS like that, always. The medical system was great before medicare and medical got introduced. It was good, and it was affordable, everyone could have it. Now the only ones that can have it are the illegals, the leeches, and those whos job provides for it, the people that just get out of high school, go to college and work part time at McDonalds are the ones suffering. Just like the people that are slightly below middle class, they are the ones who don't qualify for leeching, but at the same time can't afford insurance nor can they pay the hospital bills. Great system. Solution; First, if you are an illegal, guess what, you are not receiving care, you are in this country ILLEGALLY. Get rid of government medical and medicare. Prices for EVERYONE will drop drastically. If you don't work and require treatment, you will have to rely on help from charities (just like it should be), for everyone else, even with low paying jobs medical care should become more than affordable since they will not have to pay the tripple bill, once for the leeches (lower taxes), second for illegals (lower prices for medical care), and third time for government provided medical care (drastically lower prices for medical care).

Yeah, I've met the guy. He flew in in his own light twin Piper, so I had a chance to chat and take a picture with him. He is a great actor and seems like a great human being. He talks and treats other people with respect and is well composed, something that is rare among the celbrities crowd (Lopez for example is a complete @$^%^%, she has no respect for anyone, the saying "you can take a girl out of the trailer park, but you can't take the trailer park out of a girl" has never sounded more true when applied to her. Nothing but un-educated, dumb, beligerent trash with money). Anyway, back on topic. Morgan Freeman is an awesome, well rounded, intelligent individual. One would expect something like this to come from him and highlights the difference between an educated black man and an idiot Jessie Jackson. Man like Morgan Freeman strike fear into Democrats and Liberals. If the black people that live in poverty ever stop listening to the garbage Jackson spews out and start listening to intelligent successfull man like Freeman, there goes thier voter base. [ 12-16-2005, 02:37 AM: Message edited by: Soback ]

What he is trying to do, is give you reasons why you should pay for someone elses living, food, medical care. He is saying you need to be a good slave and work to support not only yourself, but also anyone and everyone else, because then, instead of having the leeches die, they will live along your side and retire with you. Hey, I can have a slave. I can feed him, clothe him, make sure he takes his every day showers and gets treated if he gets sick. I will also send him out to work 10 hour days starting at age 15 and ending at 65. Once he is done, I will give him $1000 allowance till he kicks the bucket for good. WOW, hold on. Why have just one slave and work him 10 hour days, and take all of his labor. Lets redo the math, err, no I meant lets be more, how do socialists put it, modern? humane? progressive? yeah, all of those, lets be more modern, humane and progressive, lets say humane and kind one more time to make it sound better, and don't forget, we are all human, we are all entitled to a living, no matter the slavery, errr, sorry, no matter the costs. How about I have 20 slaves, they work 6 to 8 hour days with a month a year off, that way I won't need to work them as hard. Also, I won't need to take ALL their pay from them, I will just take 25% or so for MY living. We ALL get health care, we ALL get food, we ALL get retirement, the only difference is THEY work, and I WILL NOT, but we ALL will be taken care of by THEIR labor, they will have no choice but to support me, forget that house one of them wanted, me and my familys living is more important than what he wants in return for his labor, he HAS to support MY family first, HIS wants beyond the essentials such as shelter, food, medical, retirement, are secondary. Sounds familiar? I wouldn't be surprised, because that's the systeme they have in Canada, Europe and plethora of other Socialist countries. So don't try to justify slavery of your fellow men by saying that their labor is confiscated for the good of the society. The Communists in Russia already tried that excuse, and we all saw the results. Once it gets started (as some say "a little bit of socialism is not bad" it means "a little bit of slavery is not bad") it's a self perpetuating circle that build onto itself and grows EVERY generation, till you have the working class toiling away and not seeing any significant improvment in their condition of life if they work 8 hours, 12 hours or don't work at all. Once that happens, guess which option they will chose. It's already happening in US, when a mother has a child, she has an option to go on government assistance or work. Once the cost of babysitting is taken out of the paycheck, it will be the same as if she were to go on government assitance. Guess which option they chose. Guess also which option the highly educated and skilled chose when they don't see a return, after having spend 6 to 10 years acuiring knowledge or skill for their career. "The corporation has a duty to its stockholders to make a profit. Many retired people depend on their investments for a living. Professionals did not spend years of their life in school in order to just get by financially. When taxes go up, prices that corporations and professionals charge need to go up in order to maintain profits. Under Taxpayer Slavery, taxpayers end up paying for taxes on corporations and professionals twice. They pay the higher prices for goods and services plus they pay higher taxes for welfare recipients in order for those welfare recipients to be able to pay the higher prices for goods and services. This is how the prices of many goods and services such as medical services are so expensive. When the Democrats play their 'get even with the rich' games, we all suffer." "Liberals think that life is a lottery and there are winners and losers. The winners must be forced to help the "losers of life's lottery". This point of view plays into the human nature tendencies of laziness and irresponsibility. Conservatives believe in the individuals ability to rise above the circumstance in his individual life and make himself a winner, they believe the school of hard knocks is a good way to learn the needed lessons to be a winner. Giving them a hand out steals the lessons from them that they need to learn in order to rise above their current situation. This point of view counteracts the human nature tendencies of laziness and irresponsibility." "For many many years the Democrats having been doing the song and dance "vote for me and I'll take the money from these people and give it to you via Medicare, Food Stamps, public housing etc. etc. etc." Since when did it become ok for one U.S. citizen to help himself to the labor of another U.S. citizen via voting for a Democrat? It is the dirtiest game in town. When a Democrat uses the leverage of the labor of the taxpayer to get elected, many times it is a Republican who ends up funding their vote buying programs, it is the worst kind of campaign finance abuse. Any Republican politicians reading this should now be clear on what is expected from them, living up to their oath of office to defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC! Any Republican politicians reading this should now know how to argue their case. You can start with telling the tax and spend Democrats, who continue to try and enslave me after you inform them of this information, that you are going to have them removed from office because they waived they're right to hold that office by violating their oath of office." "As leaders of socialism in the U.S.A., Democrat politicians and the people who vote for them promote/cause the involuntary servitude taxpayers currently labor under, defined here as Taxpayer Slavery. Until Democrats aggressively start deleting government run socialism, a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Slavery." "Taxpayer servitude started with the assistance programs created by Franklin D. Roosevelt when people were willing to go along with it during the Great Depression. It was still unconstitutional and therefore illegal, but people let it slide, after all Federal taxes were not so high and it was an "emergency". As usual, when government is able to grab some power, that power extra power will cause added corruption. Today the Taxpayer Slavery is totally out of control. Many families have working mothers and their income ends up paying the amount of taxes their family has to pay each year. Think about the labor involved to pay this level of taxation and how much better off our families would be if all of that time and effort could be spent raising our own children. Money problems are the #1 reason for divorce. We need to end taxpayer slavery for the children's sake." Quoting the average life span, and trying to justify slavery by saying that people in Socialist countries live 5 years longer. At WHAT EXPENSE. You forgot that. They get to live longer at the expense of me owning my own house, at the expense of my vacations, at the expense of my childrens education, at the expense of my retirement, and at the expense of my money, at the expense of my labor, at the expense of me fullfilling my wants with MY mone and MY labor.

No, that's not sad. What socialists allow their government to do to them is their bussiness. The REAL sad part is that the socialists in US are trying to, and in some cases already have, made it MANDATORY to get those shots. First they take our money by force, without our consent, now they are dictating what goes into our bodies, also by force, without our consent.

quote:Originally posted by nomad: Well, I never name called anybody here. Furthermore, I'am interested by what Soback defines as an insult Come now Nomad. Do you really want to go down this road? You know that I don't make a statement unless I can back it up. So, like I told you, I took no offense at your prior insults because your personal opinion of me means nothing, as that opinion has no bearing on validity of my posts. Also, I value my time, and would regret wasting it on browsing through the forum just to prove on whos been insulting whom. Seeing all this, why don't we come to an agreement that favors us both. You don't insult me in the future, I will do the same, and we both save the time arguing about this, and instead spend it actually debating things, like this Socialism the Trojan horse thing.

quote:Originally posted by Aperson: Is a person who is a "little bit" religious the same as someone who is devote? Is the person who drinks a "little bit" of alcohol at the same mental state as someone who drinks copious amounts? So having 50% of your earnings taken away and given to another is somehow better than having 100% of your earnings confiscated? Does taking only half of your money instead of all of it, to provide for another against your will, somehow diminish the criminal act of taking it away from you without your consent? So is being 1 month pregnant as opposed to being 8 months pregnant is less pregnant? So taking 50% as opposed to taking 100% to run the society is what? Less socialist? Somehow it's better? The fact of half your labor supporting someone else instead of your family is diminshed by your excuse of "it's half and not all"? Being a slave 50% is better than being a slave 100%? No, it's NOT. Being NO SLAVE is better than being A slave (be it 1% or 100%), PERIOD. quote:Originally posted by Soback: And no, I didn't. I told you what I picture when I read a reply directed at me as an insult. It doesn't apply only to Nomad, it applied to ANYONE who argues facts with insults. quote:Eh? It can be interpreted that way. Plus your insulting tone in your posts when someone disagrees with you (or even if they havenÔÇÖt yet) doesnÔÇÖt help your arguments. And you interpreting my reaction to facts argued with insults is a concern for me HOW? The tone I take is interpreted by YOUR brain, and therefore if you take offense to it, it's YOUR problem that you need to deal with, not mine. I present to you my statements, I reason them to you, and I back them up with facts for you. If you dissagree and take offense at my factual tone, it might have to do more with you having an opposing view point and not being able to argue that view point with reason and facts, not with the tone I use. If we were talking in person, I wouldn't raise my voice and yell, NOR would I speak with low soft voice as to try and make it psychologically easier for you to accept the reasons backed up by facts, for I don't need to be in any way appologetic for having a view point that difers from yours, nor do I need to be sorry while telling you that you are wrong and providing you with reasons and facts as to why. I talk to you respectfully, like one human being to another, it's when you try to reason and back up a statement with nothing but emotion as to whys in your reasons (in this case what makes others entitled to your labor) is when I start losing that respect, as a thug yelling at me to hand over my wallet is no better than a thug telling me he needs to feed his kids while robbing me. quote:Originally posted by Soback: As for me missing your point. What was your point then? You said that I broke my rules. What would that be? quote:Err, perhaps it would be clearer if I rephrased: Why did jump on nomad for insulting you (rightfully so) and yet don't mind making veiled insults? So me telling someone why they are wrong is veiled insults? When I take something that is wrong (like having 50% of your paycheck taken away) and show you the extreemly wrong situation (like having 100% of your paycheck taken away), and then call the person that tells me that my money is not mine, but someone elses, call that person a theif, you consider that a veiled insult? If so, then go ahead and explaing how a thug robbing you on the street to feed his kids is any different than a mother on wellfare given the money that you made, the same money that was take away from you by the government for the purpose of feeding her kids, and how a person that tells me that my money RIGHTFULLY belong to that mother on wellfare is any different from that same thug, for he is doing EXACTLY what that thug is doing. [ 12-14-2005, 10:13 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

quote:Originally posted by Voli0: I understood the part of text you mention above. I merely tried to show the connection between power and money(don't claim that you havent heard it before). Yes, one's money is stored labour(his or others) that can be traded. This is what the text claimed and it can be easily agreed on, at certain point. However, if one doesen't want to be a beachbum, he may have to accept to do work that his moral disagrees on. Now he is forced to do things regardless of his opposition. I merely showed that following strictly the definations of power and slavery, almost every human action including power can be defined to be slavery of some degree. You see Volio. Money is not power, it's a common misconseption that socialists teach you, because once you think that money is power, then they can tell you that money is evil because those that have money, therefore have power, and they can use that power to make people do things. So, since I said that money is NOT power, let me make a correct statement and explain it to you. MONEY does not equal power, money equals FREEDOM. Here's why. If money equaled power, then by that judgement you would have the power to FORCE someone against their FREE WILL, that is incorrect. If you tell a person I will give you 10 million dollars to cut off your finger, he WOULD NOT do it (some would do it as BECAUSE they made a calculation in their head that that finger and the pain beared is WORTH 10 million, it will buy them FREEDOM to pursue their wants and wishes, they would be cutting off their finger WILLINGLY, and that money would be compensation EARNED, not because you have POWER over them by having money), if that said beach bum does not want to be a beach bum, money has NO POWER to go make him work, he is FREE to live without money any way he wants, HOWEVER he would have to get a job or do something to GET MONEY to expand his FREEDOM OF CHOICES to fullfill his wants/needs. Money holds no power over him, the only thing money would do, is grant him more freedom and greater range of choices. Do you see the difference? The same thing was taught to me in Russia. That money is evil, being rich is evil, ect...later on in my life I learned/understoond/comprehended WHY it was taught to me that way, because once you make a link that money is power, power can be used in bad ways, and therefore can be evil and that was their justification for only FEW SELECT individuals in government having money, because they are looking out for you and your best interests and have the money (power) to protect you from evil. In America, I learned that money does NOT equal power (Communists reasoning why only select, smart, responsible individuals should have money), money equals FREEDOM and therefore EVERYONE should be FREE to make and KEEP their money. People work and earn money because they want to be free from labor once they hit retirement, they work and earn money because they want to be free to go on the vacation to Hawaii, they work and earn money because they want to be free to do whatever it is that they want. When the government takes the products your labor (money) away from you, they are taking away your freedom, when the government gives those products of your labor (money) to someone else, they are therefore making you WORK for that person, no matter your concent, and when you HAVE to work for that persons living, you are therefore a slave to them. It does not matter if only 10% of your labor goes to that other, or 50% or 100%, you are still a slave. quote: That text you referred on also claimed that consumers have the ultimate power. Wrong again. Consumers have power to some extent, but ultimately power belongs to those owning the means of production and capital(sounds very Marxists). Really, so if a company made a product that is so bad as to be useless to you, you would still buy it? The CEO, owner of that company have that much power as to get money out of you without your consent? They really hold that much power? WOW. Unbelievable. By now you probably realized what a folly that statement of yours was, and also realized who has the ultimate power, as NO BUSSINESS can FUNCTION without PROFITS. The ONLY bussiness or industry that can function without profits is GOVERNMENT RUN BUSSINESS/INDUSTRY. That's why government run bussiness/industry ALWAYS end up bleeding the country dry till collapse. quote: It is very true, especially in modern society. Too many people are depentant on the industrialists which owns the means of production(bear in mind, that I amn speaking in large scope, not meaning you or me, but whole society. Altho you or me may be capable to find replacement work, everyone isn't). People can't just quit their jobs and start cultivating the land or something. Their living standards(which they like to keep) are depending on the salary that someone is giving you as a trade good for your work. You are wrong. Just like I told you that people are free to buy or not to buy ANY product on the market. So are they free to design and produce their own product if they like it better than what's available on the market. That's how MAJORITY of US bussinesses are started. A person sees the gap in the market for a particular product that can do the job better than an existing one, or there's no existing one, and he designs, patents, and hires a factory owner to make that product for him (which is surprisingly cheap by the way, considering that you will spend less than half the final value of the product when you hire on another persons factory to make it for you, obviously depending on the complexity of the product, you might even end up building your own factory for it). You are in NO WAY obligated to keep working, you are free to quit at any time. The standard of living you use to back up your statment of people being a slave to corporations, money, or thier jobs, is a REWARD for their work, it is NOT AN ENTITLEMENT. You are NOT entitled to the tv, or a car, or a nice house, or even food for that matter. ALL of those things are REWARDS that you are FREE to buy when you get return on your labor, otherwise known as money. That also backs up my point why money doesn't equal power, but rather freedom. Aren't you free to move away from society and go cultivate fields or pick berries? Of course you are, the drop in your quality of life is nothing more than a consequence of your choice. You have to trade YOUR labor for YOUR quality of life, you shouldn't be entitled to OTHERS labor to provide you with YOUR quality of life. [ 12-14-2005, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]

quote:Originally posted by nomad: Prez: I'am glad for your daddy. However, This doesen't solve the widespread disfunctionnality of retirement plans in the US, nor the fact that you have atm a few millions elder that had to work again due to the losses they incurred in the stockmarket a few years ago. So, what about not loosing your accumulated retirement capital whatever happen to the business you work for (like in the EU, for example), and enjoying guarantees that the funds managed by businesses as pension plans are legally strictly reserved for this purpose (EU again...) ? Here's the deal. That "not loosing your accumulated retirement capital" you are talking about. Is NOT yours. It's BELONGS to the people that have WORKED their lives away, and government TOOK their work, bundled it up, and spreads it around once their generation hits retirement age. That money can be lost too. Not only is that money DILUTED by re-distributing it between the people that have worked and also the ones who have not, BUT also because if the economy declines (inflation), your retirement money that's given to you from the government, would not be worth much. And if the government compensates and tries to fullfill their promise of "good" retirement, their only choice would be to either increase taxes on the people of working age (more burden on them, more socialism created, and they become trapped deeper into socialism, that's how the system BUILD ONTO itself generation after generation till the collapse), OR to print more money and infuse it into the economy, which INCREASES the inflation even more, therefore adding to the problem of retirees allotments not being able to buy much, and STILL through higher than otherwise would be inflation increasing the burden on people of working age. quote: Soback: Then, I don't know where you found your definition of capitalism, and I suspect that you mix again your whishes with semantics. The following definition, the one I use, comes from the Encyclopaedia Britannica: CAPITALISM: also called free market economy, or free enterprise economy economic system, dominant in the Western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most of the means of production are privately owned and production is guided and income distributed largely through the operation of markets. As you may see, there is no endogen instrinsic political dimension in it. You may implement capitalism under a dictature, like what happened in Chile under Pinochet or in Panama under Noriega. Another matter are political systems who take a varying degree of direct control on the economy. This control exists in any country who isn't in chaos. It doesen't matter if a system gives less and takes back nothing, or gives much and takes back a good share of your income. At the end, the result is the same: you aren't free to do as you please. You are wrong Nomad. For true Capitalism to exist, there HAVE to be laws in place that PROTECT your OWNERSHIP, and RIGHTS of freedom. Otherwise that said Capitalism as you quote it, is nothing more than anarchy or socialism. In both cases the powers be (under anarchy) or the government (under socialism) leaves you be long enough to make money, but there's NO GUARANTEE that you will be FREE to keep what is RIGHTFULLY yours, what you have obtained from your labor, be it establishing a company or actually working as laborer. When it can all be taken away by a thug demanding protection money, as would the case be in South America, or the government beurocrat knocking on your office door and sweet talking to you about the law and there's ways to "overlook" something that was passed that law to give the government the right to COLLECT or appropriate bussinesses outright. Both cases are NOT capitalism. Like I said, Capitalism doesn't go hand in hand with lawlessness, quite the contrary, for TRUE Capitalism to exist, the laws of RIGHTFULL ownership and FREEDOMS need to exist, and the reasons why Capitalism is crumbling in US even though those laws exist, is because those said laws also need to be UPHELD. So no, when the products of your labor can be taken away and dissapear at any moment at the hands of thugs or greedy corrupt government, you are NOT free to do as you wish. Because you are not FREE to stop them and keep what you have worked to create. quote: It is psychologically particularly revealing that you link capitalism with happyness, and make abstraction of the millions of individuals suffering conditions like depression. The day you may reach a level of financial disponibility allowing you to spend without any kind of consideration, you will learn that what money does is buying illusions, not happyness. Happyness is something you have to find for yourself, and first comes by being wise enough to enjoy what you have and not to focus on the superficial & futile. Did you ever saw that there are individuals who always emit positivism, no matter the challenges they may face, when other ones get depressed for the smallest problem ? Mind over matter, bud, and it isn't money who will get you there... Yes, poor people can be happy too, just like slaves can be happy too. Just because you can achieve happiness INSPITE of all the injustice, doesn't mean that it's ok to be bearing all that injustice. Just because you are happy in your personal life when you get home after working all day, and have half your labor taken away to support another, it still not ok. Your personall happiness is no justification on government taking what's yours to feed a leech. So you can't say to a person that is protesting the confiscation of his labor "Don't be foolish, money is not everything, go find your happiness with what you have left". That's what the communists told my grand granfather when they took his property away. The fact remains, taking something that doesn't belong to you, is a CRIMINAL act, and CONFISCATING part of your labor to feed another against your will, is enslaving you TO that other.