Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 611281" data-attributes="member: 2189">Thanks Klein. One of the biggest reasons I oppose gov't programs is that over time, we learn they are nothing more that economic power grabs via state created monopolies and cartels. This also moves resources and wealth into few and few hands and places economic and regulatory roadblocks to creative thinking people who may have real ideas and solutions to some of the problems and protects businesses that may in fact be inefficent and even counterproductive in the long run. I'd rather see a true free market where absolutely everything comes to the table and the cream will rise to the top as people in a transparent system are then given and have available all the facts and no one holds an upperhand of power to hide behind. I know Canada's system is based on province control or what we in America might call, State rights or control. There's good and bad in that, I understand. However, in America, the push is towards a large central system (one major difference to the Canadian system) that would provide all means of healthcare and this pushes out all competitors that are not among the connected. Now at the same time, Canada could do like America and uses the States (Canadian provinces) as adminstrators of federal central plans but I'm not sure of that in Canada's case.  For the moment, the big monsters are giving up some goodies in concession to gov't because the long term payoff is market dominance where gov't action will in effect, clear all the other (smaller)competitors off the table. Would UPS agree to drop and hold shipping prices if the US gov't told UPS that FedEx would no longer be a competitor? Sure they would because the pure scale of customer base would more than make up for any difference. The density alone in some areas would be unreal in just vehicle and energy savings. We've been conditioned IMO to think mega monsters like a Walmart is economically superior to the smaller so-called mom and pop operations who tend to serve a more local need and who operate outside a less demand of various gov't interventions otherwise known as cost to taxpayers. If you sat down and look at Walmarts true total costs of where Walmart actually benefits from various gov't operations verses the little mom and pop, if Walmart had to operate on those same levels and pass those costs to customers, the economics might look totally different. Walmart for example has been known to use gov't for <a href="http://www.independent.org/events/transcript.asp?eventID=114" target="_blank">emient domain abuse </a>where property owners wanted more than Walmart was willing to pay. Does Joe's hardware enjoy that same power in his business? A rather famous case concerning Walmart was in <a href="http://alabamaseda.org/2009/03/18/alabaster-alabama-2003-land-grab-for-wal-mart-%E2%80%93-the-untold-story/" target="_blank">Alabaster Alabama</a> from 2003' and yet Walmart through it's political connections uses gov't to keep costs low but at what real cost? Does the local mom and pop enjoy those same gov't advantages? Did the headline read, "Walmart Destroys Lockean Idea of Individual Property Rights in the Name of Central Land Use and Resource Planning"? Would that headline have rattled some cages and yet who among the great defenders of free market capitailism among the 2 dominate paties spoke up? If the answer is no to mom and pop not being availed of Walmart's advantage, and it is the case, then this is not true free market and Walmart for example of not playing on a true level competitive field. When gov't takes market or other resources and shifts them via central planning to a specific areas of the market in order to drive a larger return for itself (the fallacy of Reaganomics and the shrinking state and yes that goes for targeted or specific tax cuts too!)this resource removal or transfer causes unintended consequences on many levels but one specific of that if the larger voting based found out what is really happening, there'd be revolts on election day.  In order to stymie this, the politicians via central planning again pass out more goodies to the voting base (this time in the so-called private non-corp. sector ie public welfare) in the hopes of pacification and for the most part it works. Global war or just war in general is another example where large amounts of resources are reallocated to the war efforts and this in turn causes shortages across the economic strata. Before fiat money and the printing press, one thing war had to do was bring back wealth in order to pay for it (remember the promise of Iraq oil production)or the locals being taxed would at some point rebel against offensive war. With the printing press, debt, debt and more debt hides the economic truth by letting inflation be the hidden tax but even this at some point has severe ramifications. Such as when the true value of the dollar goes below 5 cents and the cost of medical care, technical and college education, housing, food, gasoline, etc. begin in various means and ways to explode placing a further burden on the middle class that implodes and thus making worse on the poor and fixed income. I just see the whole thing as a big con job and we need to start calling them on it. I think this whole thing is another manufactured crisis that causes us to look one way while everything else is taking place elsewhere (where we're not looking). You'll never fix the cost of medicine until you fix a bad monetary unit and replace it with a sound one. How can the economics of anything be stable when your medium of exchange is shrinking to worthlessness? Once passed, healthcare may seem for a short while (via manipulation of the market) that problem is solved but it won't be. I also think that a lot of this is being driven by trying to sustain medicare as boomers hit the system and it's no secret medicare was in far worse shape than Social Security even before the economic downturn. But they are also trying to maintain US global hegemony to maintain the US dollar as global reserve currency and to secure both Middle East and Caspian basin energy resources. Like we as citizens are learning to live a more frugal and within our means lifestyle, so too does the gov't. This may not seem all related but it is. Just one more step towards total State/Corp. control of all aspects of the economy. That is Mussolini's Fascism and both parties are in on the fix! jmo BTW: Good observation about Tie's avatar. After his posting gay porno in the other forum, I've no doubt now that his avatar is his means of trolling for all "CUMERS!" I hear his CB handle is "Bone Appetit"<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink    :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></blockquote>

Verification