I’m sorry matt. That was a poor choice of words. I should have said intrusive, not oppressive. I’m quite well aware of the differences between a Soviet-style communist system, and the various forms of socialism represented by the various social democracies of Western Europe.

That is not to say that I am personally in favor of them, but then that doesn’t matter. I don’t live there.



So because a person has chosen to live an unhealthy life, the EVERYONE must be made to pay by surrendering their freedom to choose their own healthcare insurers or providers?

I am personally sick and tired of the government intruding constantly into my life. I am a healthy (save my bad knees) middle-aged American who is not overweight (despite my relatively sedentary lifestyle).

Because of government interference in free markets it is next to impossible for me to be able to find “full fat” foods in the grocery store these days. I like my fatty foods... they taste better. But because some people have chosen to live a less than healthy life, MY CHOICES are being gradually eroded.

And on health insurance, because of state and federal government regulations, I can’t even choose the health-care plan that I actually want. It is direct government interference in the health insurance markets that have driven the costs through the roof. If I wanted to buy a plan that excluded things like child birth, mental health care, prescription drugs, doctors visits or routine checkups well.... I be SOL (sh*t outta luck). The all-knowing GOVERNMENT has decided FOR ME, what insurance I should have or not have. If I wanted to buy a policy from a company in another state, well... I’m SOL! The all-knowing government has seen fit to DENY me that choice.

And NOW, as a SOLUTION to the mess CREATED by government regulation, our all-knowing Federal government proposes MORE regulations and having the government get into the business itself!!!!

Look, our form of government is extremely clear as to what powers are granted to the Federal government and what powers are retained by the states and/or the people. We are so far from that these days its not funny.

All I want is for the Federal government to back off, get out of my life, and let me get on with the business of leading my life the way I want.

you know, dbl is predictable, he makes very long answers with many of blahblah about how USA was great before obama and the europeans are blinds and stupid, claim that we understand nothing because we are young, critical my english ...

I wouldn't even waste YOUR money to watch even one second of a Michael Moore film.

And the so-called "explosion of banks..." etc. was the DIRECT RESULT of government interference in free-markets and of the failure of the Federal government to responsibly exercise its legitimate regulatory powers over 2 GSE's.

it's a joke?
in france, there's a stockbroker (jérôme kerviel ) who lost 5 billion euro by speculating on the stock exchange and you claim that government regulates too much stock exchanges and banks?

I don't know enough politics to have a strong debate going but based on my limited knowledge I think we may never find a system that is good for EVERYBODY. And no system is EVIL.

Communism, Socialism,Capitalism...are not evil.

But depending on your skills, wealth, ideology, and your place in the society, you may find one better suits your needs and expectations than another.

It is not to say all are equal either. But I have a hard time believing that one is inherently better than another. They can all get corrupt, misused and abused.

I like much about Socialism for instance, but that's in theory. In practice, much can go wrong, and history has shown that to be true. Capitalism too, has done some good. But it has also caused a lot of pain for many, specially those in lower classes who may be feeling exploited and helpless by a system that values business as an entity more than the people who are doing the hard work of making it work on a daily basis.

You're seriously suggesting that the banking crisis was casued by over-regulation?

last time we had a chat I think dbl suggested it was because of under-regulation but it was democrat's fault as republicans were actually pushing for more regulations.

It's both. The banking problems stemmed from the government forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them. After these loans defaulted, they were then sold up the bank ladder to larger and larger banks and lenders and recently, when they ran out of people to sell the debt up to, everything collapsed. Hence the term "bubble".

Most financial people knew something bad was looming, but did nothing. With capitalism, it has to be all or nothing. Either you regulate everything or nothing. Once you stick your nose in somewhere, you HAVE to other places too or it will be exploited.

As for whose fault it was... The PEOPLE.

you mean the poor people who needed loans or people in government who tried to help them out?

Nope, I have no problem with the government helping people get homes, it's just the government wasn't really helping people, they were making others help them. I'm all for programs like Section 8, ICAP and Medicaid that help provide people with homes, clothing, etc.

The other factors in the credit crunch? Why, yes it is the people who are at fault, people living far above their means. Folks who can't pay their rent but are walking around in $100 shoes.