Attorney Jesse Binnall testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Dec. 16 as to what resulted.
He had proof of nearly 90,000 fraudulent or improper votes that were cast, including instances where:
Also, when push comes to shove, every case but one brought to court had zero evidence to prove voter fraud. If the percentage of fraud exists to the level you indicate, and in a state that is traditionally Republican dominated, how the hell could they've let Biden win? The answer is simple, there was no fraud.
Dream Master
Philthy74 wrote to Dream Master <=-
Also, when push comes to shove, every case but one brought to court had zero evidence to prove voter fraud. If the percentage of fraud exists to the level you indicate, and in a state that is traditionally Republican dominated, how the hell could they've let Biden win? The answer is simple, there was no fraud.
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their
beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated.
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their
beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated.
Generalize much? I'm not really a "Trump believer", but.... fuck you asshole. I guarantee you I'm none of those things you say, especially "uneducated". You ignorant fuck.
Philthy74 wrote to Dream Master <=-
Also, when push comes to shove, every case but one brought to court had zero evidence to prove voter fraud. If the
percentage of fraud exists to the level you indicate, and in a state that is traditionally Republican dominated, how the
hell could they've let Biden win? The answer is simple, there was no fraud.
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their
beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated.
Generalize much? I'm not really a "Trump believer", but.... fuck you asshole. I guarantee you I'm none of those things you say, especially "uneducated". You ignorant fuck.
... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their
beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated.
Generalize much? I'm not really a "Trump believer", but.... fuck you asshole. I guarantee you I'm none of those things you say, especially "uneducated". You ignorant fuck.
Guys, come on, let's stop the name calling. I realize when we
debate some of our personal biases come out, but attacking each
other is disrepectful.
I had to teach myself some time ago that
sometimes it is necessary to take a step back and assess what is
being said and how a response should be made.
Philthy74 wrote to Dream Master <=-
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated. Same lot as the conspiracy theorists. Instead of facing reality, they live in a warm,
cozy little world and make things up to get attention.
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Gamgee to Philthy74 on Thu Jan 14 2021 09:19 pm
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their
beloved dictator; childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated.
Generalize much? I'm not really a "Trump believer", but.... fuck you
asshole. I guarantee you I'm none of those things you say, especially
"uneducated". You ignorant fuck.
Guys, come on, let's stop the name calling. I realize when we debate some of our personal biases come out, but attacking each other is disrepectful. I had to teach myself some time ago that sometimes it is necessary to take a step back and assess what is being said and how a response should be made.
Peace, guys. Peace.
I'm not sure why we bother to debate this since everybody has made up their minds at this point and nothing anyone says is going to change anyones opinion. But there has to be an expectation that people are going to get irritated and pissed off when someone makes a blanket statement that all Trump supporters are childish, ignorant, racist and uneducated. The OP *is* an ignorant fuck.
If the left wants peace and harmony and unity then stop stoking the fucking fire already.
I'm not sure why we bother to debate this since everybody has made up their minds at this point and nothing anyone says is going to change anyones opini But there has to be an expectation that people are going to get irritated an pissed off when someone makes a blanket statement that all Trump supporters childish, ignorant, racist and uneducated. The OP *is* an ignorant fuck.
If the left wants peace and harmony and unity then stop stoking the fucking fire already.
Immortal
It's not pretty but it's important that we have this discussion in light of recent events. You don't have to take part if you'd rather not.
Also, when push comes to shove, every case but one brought to court had zero ev
dence to prove voter fraud. If the percentage of fraud exists to the level you
indicate, and in a state that is traditionally Republican dominated, how the he
l could they've let Biden win? The answer is simple, there was no fraud.
Of course there wasn't. Trump believers are just like their beloved dictator;
childish, ignorant, racist, and uneducated. Same lot as the conspiracy theorists. Instead of facing reality, they live in a warm, cozy little world and
make things up to get attention. If you look at how most of these supporters act,
it's amusing.
What exactly is the purpose of this important discussion? The left thinks Trump supporters can go fuck themselves and the right thinks Biden supporters can go fuck themselves. So lets just cut to the chase and everyone just go fuck themselves.
You just repeating over and over like a broken record that there was no fraud and Donald Trump is the worst human being on the face of the planet isn't really much of a discussion, it is simply your opinion.
You just repeating over and over like a broken record that there was no fraud a
d Donald Trump is the worst human being on the face of the planet isn't really >uch of a discussion, it is simply your opinion.
Immortal wrote to Dream Master <=-
If the left wants peace and harmony and unity then stop stoking the fucking fire already.
Immortal wrote to Al <=-
You just repeating over and over like a broken record that there was no fraud and Donald Trump is the worst human being on the face of the
planet isn't really much of a discussion, it is simply your opinion.
I always suggest that you read "1984" by George Orwell. It pretty much describes what the Lefties want.
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Dr. What to Immortal on Sun Jan 17 2021 08:47 am
I always suggest that you read "1984" by George Orwell. It pretty
much describes what the Lefties want.
You know what I want? I want people to be protected socially, physically, and economically. I don't want medical bills bankrupting people. I want to see our roads, bridges, and waterways without holes, not rusting, and clean and safe. I want people to stop confusing social programs with socialism.
But hey, fuck us all. Let's have anarchy and everyone fend for themselves. If a friend of mine goes bankrupt because they got cancer, well, fuck 'em.
Yeah, that's not we should be as a society.
we have a fragile thing going on here. 2 more years of economic problems and we might be eating each other. we dont have what it takes to create a utopia where everything is handled.
Re: Re: Fraud
By: MRO to Dream Master on Sun Jan 17 2021 10:26 pm
we have a fragile thing going on here. 2 more years of economic problems and we might be eating each other. we dont ha
what it takes to create a utopia where everything is handled.
I'm not wanting a utopia, I simply want everyone to be able to live a good life without fear of going bankrupt because they
sick. The rest of world, nope. In the US, yep. Something is definitely wrong here.
Dream Master
Dream Master wrote to Dr. What <=-
I always suggest that you read "1984" by George Orwell. It pretty much describes what the Lefties want.
You know what I want? I want people to be protected socially,
physically, and economically. I don't want medical bills
bankrupting people. I want to see our roads, bridges, and
waterways without holes, not rusting, and clean and safe. I want
people to stop confusing social programs with socialism.
But hey, fuck us all. Let's have anarchy and everyone fend for themselves. If a friend of mine goes bankrupt because they got
cancer, well, fuck 'em.
Yeah, that's not we should be as a society.
There's a big difference between that extreme, and the opposite
extreme (socialism/communism). We are currently (and always have
been) somewhere in between those extremes. Social programs are
critical, no doubt, but........ what can happen (and what *HAS*
happened) is that there is rampant abuse/fraud in those programs and
as a result they don't do enough. If all the lazy freeloaders were
removed, the programs could service those who actually *NEED* help,
and all the healthcare/infrastructure problems would be over.
Simple, eh? The problem comes with the Left's refusual to clean
things up. They (Dems) need those programs to keep all the abusers dependent on their government, so that the votes keep coming in from
those folks for the Dems. Really, it's that simple. It's a vicious
circle situation, one feeds the other.
Yeah, that's not we should be as a society.
Agreed again. The real issue is that we *COULD* fix all of this, but
refuse to.
But hey, fuck us all. Let's have anarchy and everyone fend for themselves. I
a friend of mine goes bankrupt because they got cancer, well, fuck 'em.
The rest of world, nope.
If you remove the need for those to create fraud and abuse, then we can service everyone
equally. The argument between the left and right (and how they've flipped over the years),
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Mon Jan 18 2021 08:43 am
There's a big difference between that extreme, and the opposite
extreme (socialism/communism). We are currently (and always have
been) somewhere in between those extremes. Social programs are
critical, no doubt, but........ what can happen (and what *HAS*
happened) is that there is rampant abuse/fraud in those programs and
as a result they don't do enough. If all the lazy freeloaders were
removed, the programs could service those who actually *NEED* help,
and all the healthcare/infrastructure problems would be over.
If you remove the need for those to create fraud and abuse, then
we can service everyone equally. The argument between the left
and right (and how they've flipped over the years), is that
whites considered blacks freeloaders and that social programs
benefitted them. Essentially, taxing white people for social
programs benefitted black people. This antiquated ideal created
a war of words between left and right leaning people. The
solution to the problem is simple: if you are a citizen of the
United States, whether you work or not, you are taken care of.
Simple, eh? The problem comes with the Left's refusual to clean
things up. They (Dems) need those programs to keep all the abusers dependent on their government, so that the votes keep coming in from
those folks for the Dems. Really, it's that simple. It's a vicious
circle situation, one feeds the other.
There is nothing to clean up. Right leaning individuals don't
want government intervention until they absolutely need it. Some
of the staunchest right leaning states are also the poorest and
are some of the highest receivers of state and federal aid and
subsidy. The argument that this is a "leftie" problem is a false narrative as the states that lean right refuse to acknowledge
their problem and continue to vote Republican because they put
their "faith-based" spin on everything.
Yeah, that's not we should be as a society.
Agreed again. The real issue is that we *COULD* fix all of this, but
refuse to.
We've tried. There are too many members of Congress who are in
the pockets of hospitals and insurance companies. You remove the lobbyists, you solve the problem.
Arelor wrote to Dream Master <=-servi
@MSGID: <6006109D.3563.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
@REPLY: <6005C5FC.2549.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Dream Master to Gamgee on
Mon Jan 18 2021 10:31 am
If you remove the need for those to create fraud and abuse, then we can
ce everyoneov
equally. The argument between the left and right (and how they've flipped
er the years),
Here is the thing:
Lots of people who does not need to abuse the system are going to abuse the system. Greed works like that.
Main reason why governments hire public officers is that then they can keep offering perks to the public officers with everybody else's money, and buy their votes that way. Once you pocket in two more groups you
have a solid voter base. And you are not even using your own money.
Then you have people who is rolling in money (like some guy I know) get some help funds they do not need because they belong to minority X...
they will vote the party who is giving them free stuff and the party
will keep getting stuff for them with _your_ money because their
minority is more relevant than yours in the polls.
Then you get good old heterowhites screwed because some pandemic hits
and there are no resources for them because they were all wasted in art/ethnic support/film development programs, with a lot of people who didn't really need the funds more than a lot of people who is not
getting a dime.
It is all a giganting auction, in which some political party tries to gather votes by bidding with somebody else's wallet.
we have a fragile thing going on here. 2 more years of economic
problems and we might be eating each other. we dont have what it
takes to create a utopia where everything is handled.
I'm not wanting a utopia, I simply want everyone to be able to live a good life without fear of going bankrupt because they got sick. The rest of world, nope. In the US, yep. Something is definitely wrong here.
Sorry for the wall of text, but I am a bit touchy with this subject because there is this whole political current trying to demonize everything that is not socialized healthcare and it is trying very hard to damage the way I make a living. I am fed up with communist posters that yell for the expropiation of private facilities - you know the ones that work - and the gov has been trying to apply a 21% extra tax for private healthcare - because they have realized everybody is using it instead of
Your last sentence is not a "solution", it's a continuation of the
problem (abuse/fraud). It removes the incentive for lazy fucks to
work, because they can do almost/as good by not working. So that's
what they do. It's also the classic Lefty/socialist plank in the Dem platform. So, no thanks, that's no solution. Also, it's not a
black/white thing, there are just as many moochers regardless of
color. If the government cracked down on abuse, and the assholes
realized they had to work if they want to eat, well....... they'd
fuckin work.
Simple, eh? The problem comes with the Left's refusual to clean
things up. They (Dems) need those programs to keep all the abusers dependent on their government, so that the votes keep coming in from those folks for the Dems. Really, it's that simple. It's a vicious circle situation, one feeds the other.
It's not a false narrative, and "faith" has nothing to do with it.
It's simple abuse/fraud, that the left condones, because it keeps
their voters dependent on them, and guarantees they (the lefty
politicians) will continue to receive their votes.
Lobbyists are indeed a problem, and should be prevented from doing
what they do, but much of that is behind closed doors and nearly
impossible to prevent. A better solution is TERM LIMITS. My
preference would be ONE six-year term for a House member, and up to
TWO four-year terms for a Senator. That's it. Also should be massive reductions in the pension they get for serving that short of a time.
it's not always as good for them as you might think. canada for example. there are differences in coverage based on the region and i believe you are only covered when you have a hospital stay; nothing else.
the thing is, even if you have good coverage, depending on the state, if you have something serious your employer can dump you because you can't come into work.
i'd rather use sometihng like singapore's private health care facilities than live like people in sweden do.
also note that these countries that have everything 'free' are a lot smaller and different than the usa.
MRO wrote to Dream Master <=-
we have a fragile thing going on here. 2 more years of economic
problems and we might be eating each other. we dont have what it
takes to create a utopia where everything is handled. ---
Gamgee wrote to Dream Master <=-
Your last sentence is not a "solution", it's a continuation of the
problem (abuse/fraud).
the thing is, even if you have good coverage, depending on the state,
if you have something serious your employer can dump you because you
can't come into work.
This is why socialized healthcare and worker protections would come into play. If you remove the employee's fear that they will be terminated when they get sick and end up in the hospital (short enought to not warrant short-term disability but long enough that they miss a week of work), they'll get the healthcare they need as soon as they're sick versus when
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Mon Jan 18 2021 09:15 pm
Your last sentence is not a "solution", it's a continuation of the
problem (abuse/fraud). It removes the incentive for lazy fucks to
work, because they can do almost/as good by not working. So that's
what they do. It's also the classic Lefty/socialist plank in the Dem platform. So, no thanks, that's no solution. Also, it's not a
black/white thing, there are just as many moochers regardless of
color. If the government cracked down on abuse, and the assholes
realized they had to work if they want to eat, well....... they'd
fuckin work.
Yet, who cares?
What incentives do people have if they
constantly remain in poverty?
If all you can do is work at
McDonald's for the rest of your life, are you going to attempt to
better yourself?
If all you've ever been told is "You're not
smart enough to go to college, you're not smart enough to get a
better job," and if you believe it, all you are going to do is
work at McDonald's and continue being in poverty.
are people who are the "intentionally homeless" because their
income doesn't afford them the ability to own a home or pay rent
yet they can have a cell phone... so, they live in community
dwellings or in tent cities. (btw, I am using McDonald's as an
example of companies who pay low wages with zero benefits.)
If you read history, you'll clearly see that white conservative
leaning people have always tagged black individuals as consumers
of social programs, yet, this isn't true. The argument for
social programs is to help the masses yet conservatives won't
step out of their comfort zone and actually help the masses
because the narrative they've been "taught" is that they are
paying for others (read black) laziness.
It's not a false narrative, and "faith" has nothing to do with it.
It's simple abuse/fraud, that the left condones, because it keeps
their voters dependent on them, and guarantees they (the lefty
politicians) will continue to receive their votes.
..If the government cracked down on abuse, and the assholes
realized they had to work if they want to eat, well.......
they'd fuckin work.
I am not really on board with the idea that if you have no studies you are a failure. If anything we have a surplus of degreed people who ends up working at fast foods because there is no need for 800 biology professors in a town with 1000 inhabitants :( In fact I think it is very likely that if you spent the time to get a degree you lack real professional experience - experience that you should have gotten with the degree with was most likely never gathered at college. You are going to learn more about engineering kicking a boiler into functioning than in two months of Applied Thermodynamics at college.
I'm a softawre engineer who went to college for it. I've worked with one or two people who people who were self-studied in software development - I think it's possible to be a good software developer that way, though people without the educational background might not be familiar with some things that people with the educational background would know. There was one person I worked with who was self-taught in software development, and sometimes we'd mention some things related to software development or math & things we learned in college, and he'd say he wasn't familiar with that.
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Arelor to Dream Master on Wed Jan 20 2021 09:28 am
I am not really on board with the idea that if you have no studies you a failure. If anything we have a surplus of degreed people who ends up working at fast foods because there is no need for 800 biology professo in a town with 1000 inhabitants :( In fact I think it is very likely th if you spent the time to get a degree you lack real professional experience - experience that you should have gotten with the degree wit was most likely never gathered at college. You are going to learn more about engineering kicking a boiler into functioning than in two months Applied Thermodynamics at college.
I think that's true for some jobs & situations. But there are jobs where a college education or some kind of certification is beneficial. Would you wa to see a surgeon who hasn't had an education and is learning on the job?
I'm a softawre engineer who went to college for it. I've worked with one or two people who people who were self-studied in software development - I thin it's possible to be a good software developer that way, though people withou the educational background might not be familiar with some things that peopl with the educational background would know. There was one person I worked w who was self-taught in software development, and sometimes we'd mention some things related to software development or math & things we learned in colleg and he'd say he wasn't familiar with that.
Nightfox
DM Worse, there
are people who are the "intentionally homeless" because their
income doesn't afford them the ability to own a home or pay rent
yet they can have a cell phone... so, they live in community
dwellings or in tent cities. (btw, I am using McDonald's as an
example of companies who pay low wages with zero benefits.)
Yep, those are the kind of people who fall into the "fuck 'em"
category for me. If you can spend all that money on the latest cell
phone, and $300 sneakers, etc... then you should be helping yourself.
You seem to insist on keeping the black/racism element alive in the conversation. I've already said that if anything, the majority of
welfare program abusers are not black. There's no color/race thing
going on here. Fraud and abuse have no place, and that is exactly why
these programs don't help those who actually need the help. If the
fucking abuse was removed, the programs could serve those who really
need it, and serve them well enough to lift them out of the vicious
circle of poverty. But the political left won't let that happen, for
reasons that I've already stated. It would ruin them politically.
It used to be the case that the way a would-be surgeon would become a surgeon was to work with an actual surgeon and help him opening people up :-) Last time the subject came up with a thraumatologist around, he mentioned that there are some things you may learn in the classroom, but for some delicate stuff he could see no way to learn it but by close experience.
I am not tlking about becoming good at a job without having a degree. I am talking about this modern idea that unless you get one of these jobs that requires a degree, you are a hopeless failure. There is a lot of people who seem to think that if you don't become a doctor or a lawyer and end up being a salesman you screwed up in life.
There are plenty succesful people with no University experience who prove that line wrong.
Also, there are Computer Science students doing their last year that don't know that passwords are to be stored in hashed form, what TLS is, and could not code a line of C++ for the life of them. When I went to HP's boot camp the general feeling in the place was that people was learning more in 2 months there than in 2 years in college.
Man, you managed to get me a bit depresed.
Dream Master wrote to Dr. What <=-
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Dr. What to Immortal on Sun Jan 17 2021 08:47 am
I always suggest that you read "1984" by George Orwell. It pretty much describes what the Lefties want.
You know what I want? I want people to be protected socially,
physically, and economically. I don't want medical bills bankrupting people. I want to see our roads, bridges, and waterways without holes, not rusting, and clean and safe. I want people to stop confusing
social programs with socialism.
But hey, fuck us all. Let's have anarchy and everyone fend for themselves. If a friend of mine goes bankrupt because they got cancer, well, fuck 'em.
Dream Master wrote to MRO <=-
Re: Re: Fraud
By: MRO to Dream Master on Sun Jan 17 2021 10:26 pm
we have a fragile thing going on here. 2 more years of economic problems and we might be eating each other. we dont have what it takes to create a utopia where everything is handled.
I'm not wanting a utopia, I simply want everyone to be able to live a
good life without fear of going bankrupt because they got sick. The
rest of world, nope. In the US, yep. Something is definitely wrong
here.
Dream Master
---
þ Synchronet þ Caught in a Dream - Coming Soon!
Ogg wrote to Gamgee <=-
There are ways to remain "professionally unemployable". Simply
do not change your clothes, maintain poor hygiene, and act
stupid. No one will want to employ you. Meanwhile the gov't
will pay you welfare for life, and add a disability benefit for
your mental condition.
Like everything in this world, we learn by doing. Colleges teach us how to do something but not why we do it. For example, when I was in college, they were teaching Pascal first then would move onto C and eventually ASM.
It's interesting to see college graduates who've focused on Systems Administration and Engineering. They may have four to six years of college behind them but they simply have no clue. Don't get me wrong, they understand the concepts but don't comprehend why. My thirty years in the field, the trial and error, the self-study, they've all paid off. Would I
Also, there are Computer Science students doing their last year that don't know that passwords are to be stored in hashed form, what TLS is, and could not code a line of C++ for the life of them. When I went to HP's boot camp the general feeling in the place was that people was learning more in 2 months there than in 2 years in college.
Ogg wrote to Gamgee <=-
There are ways to remain "professionally unemployable". Simply
do not change your clothes, maintain poor hygiene, and act
stupid. No one will want to employ you. Meanwhile the gov't
will pay you welfare for life, and add a disability benefit for
your mental condition.
Too true, unfortunately.
I've seen too many people who worked to become unemployable. Every reason they get turned down for a job is directly related to a (bad) decision that they made.
i live in a state that is usually called a welfare state. people could have a bunch of kids and do better than upper middle class by living off the system.
i've seen people that love doing drugs just get disability.
i've seen people that love doing drugs just get disability.
It makes sense. Hell, alcoholism is considered a disability.
i live in a state that is usually called a welfare state. people could have a bunch of kids and do better than upper middle class by living off the system.
i've seen people that love doing drugs just get disability.
A sound tech I know swears that one of her friends is trying to cause permanent neurological damage on himself in order to get government funds, via marihuana abuse :-P
I hate to say it, but its like they raise up idiots on purpose, just to qualify
for checks because there is learning issues or......... whatever will check the
boxes and make the checks come in.
Its sad. And now, I wish I would have listened more.
I think everyone reaches a certain age where they wish they'd listened more about this or that. It is a symptom of getting older and wiser.
Re: Re: Fraud
By: Dumas Walker to PAULIE420 on Fri Jan 22 2021 04:22 pm
I think everyone reaches a certain age where they wish they'd listened
more about this or that. It is a symptom of getting older and wiser.
My parents never pushed for college, it was something I wanted to do. Neither of my parents have degrees but both had successful careers in defense and finance. As I've gotten older, I see what my parents did wrong with me and I am trying not to do the same with my children.
Over the years, I never knew for certain that parents/families were doing that, but I did catch on sometimes when I was younger than parents of other kids seemed to discourage their academic
curiousity... i.e. they'd make fun
of them if they did something smart, moreso than they would if they did something dumb.
i've seen people that love doing drugs just get disability.
It makes sense. Hell, alcoholism is considered a disability.
i have more skills than most college educated people and i'm just as smart or smarter. at my job i'd say that only like 5% of us have a brain. they hire these people that have all these degrees and they bomb out after 1 year.
I think everyone reaches a certain age where they wish they'd listened more >> about this or that. It is a symptom of getting older and wiser.
My parents never pushed for college, it was something I wanted to do. Neither >f my parents have degrees but both had successful careers in defense and financ
. As I've gotten older, I see what my parents did wrong with me and I am tryin
not to do the same with my children.
well, it's important to go for something useful. i know a woman who spent a lot
of time in college and she's just a car porter now.
i dropped out of college because of the program they had being fucking whacko
various ways and i needed to make money.
well, it's important to go for something useful. i know a woman wholot
spent a
of time in college and she's just a car porter now.
Political Science? Humanities? Gender Studies? Performing Arts?
i dropped out of college because of the program they had being fucking
whacko various ways and i needed to make money.
I almost ran out of money and almost had to. They kept switching stuff around and making it real difficult to get all of the last classes you needed to graduate.
I know a fellow who clears about $4K/mo! with various disability
funding, old-age security, and gov't pension supplements, and
he's not even a Canadian citizen - just a landed immigrant.
It is a if society was trying to normaliz mediocrity.
yeah that's what i ran into. and there would be a course i would have to take >nd it would be gone and they didnt know when it would come back. and the class
s were day and night. i have a life, i needed to make money, i was taking care >f my son, and i didnt live in their bullshit world of weird protocols.
I know a fellow who clears about $4K/mo! with various disability
funding, old-age security, and gov't pension supplements, and
he's not even a Canadian citizen - just a landed immigrant.
I know a fellow who clears about $4K/mo! with various disability
funding, old-age security, and gov't pension supplements, and
he's not even a Canadian citizen - just a landed immigrant.
That is part of the reason why I cannot figure out why some people want that ability here. Canada is a beautiful country and most everyone speaks English. Just move up there, or lead your caravan up there. Why stop in the USA where we don't already do all the things you want?
i dont think canada is that welcoming but i think we should put that caravan on a boat to canada with some film crews to ease it along :D
i dont think canada is that welcoming but i think we should put that
caravan on a boat to canada with some film crews to ease it along :D
I agree, contrary to what people thing, not just anybody can get in. For a skilled worked which it can make it easier we are taking of a multi years process not unlike us immigration. We do deport and have detention center etc.
That is part of the reason why I cannot figure out why some people want that ability here. Canada is a beautiful country
and most everyone speaks English. Just move up there, or lead your caravan up there. Why stop in the USA where we don't
already do all the things you want?
En> I agree, contrary to what people thing, not just anybody can get in. For
En> a skilled worked which it can make it easier we are taking of a multi
En> years process not unlike us immigration. We do deport and have detention
En> center etc.
I've always been of the opinion that you should make your best reasonable effort to improve the conditions of your own country before heading out, but you do you, man. Do what the Buzzfeed readers said they would in 2016 and accept that this country is beyond saving in time.
It might be easier to get into Canada, but it's not automatic. Usually
if you can prove that you have a job contract with a Canadian employer and no criminal past it's doable (but your stay can be locked to the
job, lose the job and you might have to leave). For immigration in general it work on a point system, so you get point on mastery of the language, education, etc. There is a fixed numbers of immigrant every year and your score will help to get picked. They is also factors like reassembling families and humanitarian reason. Just one can't just
assume you can permanent residency just like that :-D
What I hate is that in some countries there is phony agency that tell people that for a price they can get easier residency, but it's a scam. People get defrauded then blame Canada.
Naturally a visitor would not be allowed to work nor would receive free health care etc.
What change in the last decade I think is that now people immigrate to Canada to live in Canada. In the past we where more a "gateway" to the U.S. I had a lot of former co-workers that came to Canada so it would be
Does mastery of the language include learning French? Or would it be enough to just have mastery of English? (or just French for that matter?)
Does marriage to a Canadian citizen help with getting residency/citizenship in Canada?
It's frustrating that people try to defraud people that way.
If a visitor is in Canada and has to go to a hospital for some reason, I'd assume they'd be billed for their hospital stay?
It seems to me Canada would be a decent place to live.
One time when I was looking for work, I considered looking outside my state and even in Canada, because why not? I was looking into it and found that if I decided I'd want dual citizenship with Canada and the US, one consequence is I'd have to pay taxes to both the US and Canada, even if I was living in Canada (at least, that was my understanding).
That is part of the reason why I cannot figure out why some people want that ability here. Canada is a beautiful country and most everyone speaks
English. Just move up there, or lead your caravan up there. Why stop in the USA where we don't already do all the things you want?
i dont think canada is that welcoming but i think we should put that caravan o
a boat to canada with some film crews to ease it along :D
"Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, persons seeking
refugee protection must make a claim in the first country they arrive in (United States or Canada)"
Ennev wrote to MRO <=-
We have health care, disability pensions etc. but we also have to make sure it's sustainable with tax money from a working population.
We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency in order to make
the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.
Nightfox wrote to Ennev <=-
Does mastery of the language include learning French? Or would it be enough to just have mastery of English? (or just French for that
matter?)
Considering that any of the persons in question have to cross the US to get to Canada first, it sounds like Canada cooked up an idea and got some
dummies here to agree with it. :)
You are extremely naive here. You got the private insurance company right but your way off the mark with the government program.
The CEO of a company will get fired if he doesn't make happy customers
and shareholders. But nothing will happen to the government officials who kill customers and the "shareholders" have no say since they don't get to vote
those people in or our of office.
Government programs are always horribly inefficient and loaded with graft. Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.
I think you just have to get into the habit of adding "eh?" to the end
of every sentance. 8)
Dr. What wrote to Ennev <=-
@MSGID: <60118CF4.42546.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <600EDC80.11313.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
Ennev wrote to MRO <=-
We have health care, disability pensions etc. but we also have to make sure it's sustainable with tax money from a working population.
Similar to the Scandanavian "socialism" that Bernie keeps touting.
They are very capitalist in wealth creation, but socialist in wealth distribution. So **everyone** pays in to the system (even the poor)
to get the "free" health care, etc. That't the part the Bernie people keep neglecting to say: 50% tax on everyone.
We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency in order to make
the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.
You are extremely naive here. You got the private insurance company
right but your way off the mark with the government program.
The CEO of a company will get fired if he doesn't make happy customers
and shareholders. But nothing will happen to the government officials
who kill customers and the "shareholders" have no say since they don't
get to vote those people in or our of office.
Government programs are always horribly inefficient and loaded with
graft. Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying
to reduce or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.
On 2021-01-27 9:31 a.m., Dr. What wrote:
I think you just have to get into the habit of adding "eh?" to the end
of every sentance. 8)
It's like saying that all American have a southern accent :-)
There is regions indeed that use "eh?" but I do here it more from people from the maritime, but it's really in decline, younger people don't use that, usually it's elders.
that, usually it's elders.
But oddly when it's time to make the bill, because most of the time it's
you the patient that pay and them claim the work insurance for a refund.
Well theses dentist before fixing a price will always ask :
"are you covered by an insurance?"
Because yes, if you are insured they'll charge more.
We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency
order to make the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.
By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders, but
those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those that
own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.
I don't know for the US, but here you are Canadian if you are born in
Canada. Canadian parents having a baby abroad have to go trough steps so
the kid can obtains citizenship, it's not automatic. Seen case where
parent forgot to complete the process and the grown up kid end up with a
lot of trouble.
Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.
In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)
On the other hand, in most cases I think a child born abroad to US citizens is considered a US citizen, although it may call into question their
"natural born citizen" status should they even want to run for office (not sure about that).
We have/had the same thing in the USA. If your mother comes into the country and then gives birth, you are a citizen. As you pointed out, some parents do that, then use the kid as an "anchor baby" to try to get citizenship for themselves.
On the other hand, in most cases I think a child born abroad to US citizens is considered a US citizen, although it may call into question their "natural born citizen" status should they even want to run for office (not sure about that).
In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)
Just for clarity, that means the government spends more per person? Interesting.
Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you have to actually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not sure why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizens and moved back to the US at an early age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they wanted to.
In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)
Just for clarity, that means the government spends more per person?
Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-bu
@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:
By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders,
tthat
those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those
own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.
Yes, governments should be seen like this.
I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual citizens pay for their own healthcare, or does that also account for what the government pays in countries where healhcare is socialized?
Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-
@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:
By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders,bu
tthat
those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those
own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.
Yes, governments should be seen like this.
I don't think they should by seen like this, not at all. The relationship between the citizen and their government is not
based on 'stakeholderism' but duty. There is a mutual duty.
We create insitutions to serve us. Shareholders don't create the company, or even if they did, it wouldn't be to serve them
Big difference there.
The government PURPOSE is to ensure that the civilisation, the nation that we build works effectively for our wellbeing and
sustained existance as a people. Our duty to the government is to protect our nation by ensuring that the government can do
this effectively (and this in part involves policing the government).
... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
An administrator that has enough power WILL try to work less and make more money out of his position even if it is at the
expense of the whole organization.
My point is that governments are supposed to be something mystical and magical, but are built by people, in order to pursue
that people's interests. If it didn't pursue their interests, they would not bother to build it. All this talk about a
government made by the whole population for the whole population is jjust propaganda spread so the population keeps sustaining
the lifestyle of the Administration's agents.
Not sure if they'd follow it to the letter now.. Ted Cruz born in Canada, but a US citizen... John McCain born somewhere else, military base... he's a US citizen... I think Trump proved Obama wasn't a citizen and he became President. There U go...
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
I guess there is no perfect system.
I think there can be a lot of collusion and corruption.
Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-
Scandinavia is as Capitalist as any other Capitalist country.
Government spending isn't Socialism. Public ownership of the means of production is.
By the way, the government is like a big company.
Dumas Walker wrote to DR. WHAT <=-
Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.
They should consult with Greece to see what happens when a government tries to ween the citizens off of the teet.
Nightfox wrote to Ennev <=-
In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)
I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual citizens
pay for their own healthcare, or does that also account for what the government pays in countries where healhcare is socialized?
HusTler wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
For even more clarity healthcare in the United States cost twice as
much more then other countries. That's why the US is the highest on the list.
Unless we look hard at the bill... er... statement to see what the doctor charged the insurance company for (and if I'm not paying anything, why
look hard at the bill?) we won't see the charges for services not rendered.
But we know that socialized medicine isn't the answer. Well, I guess it could be the answer if the question was "how do we siphon off money from
the health care market to line our own pockets?"
We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.
Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of people
HusTler wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
Hu> For even more clarity healthcare in the United States cost twice as
Hu> much more then other countries. That's why the US is the highest on the
Hu> list.
That's partly because of price controls in other countries.
If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.
But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.
Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?
But you can't keep dual citizenship then.
But I get it you would want a president that is clear of allegiance to another country.
We have/had the same thing in the USA. If your mother comes into the country and then gives birth, you are a citizen. As you pointed out, some parents do that, then use the kid as an "anchor baby" to try to get citizenship for themselves.
I think I heard they repealed that, at least for non-citizens giving birth in t
e US, since there were many people coming to the US to give birth so their chil
would have US citizenship. But maybe I'm wrong.
Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you have to >ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In some ways I'm not s
re why that's a requirement - Someone could have been born abroad to US citizen
and moved back to the US at an early age and grew up in the US. In that case,
I think it's a bit unfair if they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w
nted to.
Just for clarity, that means the government spends more per person?
For even more clarity healthcare in the United States cost twice as much more
then other countries. That's why the US is the highest on the list.
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: IB Joe to Nightfox on Thu Jan 28 2021 05:57 pm
Not sure if they'd follow it to the letter now.. Ted Cruz born in
Canada, but a US citizen... John McCain born somewhere else,
military base... he's a US citizen... I think Trump proved Obama
wasn't a citizen and he became President. There U go...
Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.
Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?
Remember Martin Shkreli?
What I find odd is that here price of medication is cheaper and contrary to what people in the US know, it's not covered by healthcare. People pays for it, so either you buy an insurance to cover them or it's out of your pockets. But now some province force you into theirs plan if you don't have one from your work ect. We do manufacture locally and do research, Montreal is still see as hub in biomedical research. How come it get to be less expensive? Not that much price fixing.
Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.
Arelor wrote to Boraxman <=-shareholders
@MSGID: <6013E9A8.3709.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
@REPLY: <601337FB.20007.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Ennev on
Thu Jan 28 2021 09:19 pm
Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-
@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:
By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all
,be
bu
tthat
those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those
own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.
Yes, governments should be seen like this.
I don't think they should by seen like this, not at all. The relationship
tween the citizen and their government is not
based on 'stakeholderism' but duty. There is a mutual duty.
We create insitutions to serve us. Shareholders don't create the company,or
even if they did, it wouldn't be to serve themwe
Big difference there.
The government PURPOSE is to ensure that the civilisation, the nation that
build works effectively for our wellbeing andou
sustained existance as a people. Our duty to the government is to protect
r nation by ensuring that the government can do
this effectively (and this in part involves policing the government).
... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
Thing is, people serves their own interests.
A public officer is "people" first and "public officer" second, or
third, or forth....
There is a lot of people who seem to think that administration personal are magical light beings that are public officers first and foremost.
Fat chance. If you are a town hall secretary it serves your interests better that more secretaries are hired, so you have to work less, than having a bumpy road you never use repaired.
An administrator that has enough power WILL try to work less and make
more money out of his position even if it is at the expense of the
whole organization.
The second thing is, big corporations suffer pretty much this same problem. The main difference is that you can opt out of being a
customer of most corporations or at least reduce your relationship with them, so if they fail to keep their house tidy, it is a bit less of a problem.
The government or the town hall can send the cops to shove a baton up
your ass if you fail to purchase their services via taxes. And if you complain that the mayor is using all the money to fund his own
propaganda campaign instead of helping the poor (for example) and therefore has no legit claim on your tax money, you'll get labeled a raving lunatic.
My point is that governments are supposed to be something mystical and magical, but are built by people, in order to pursue that people's interests. If it didn't pursue their interests, they would not bother
to build it. All this talk about a government made by the whole
population for the whole population is jjust propaganda spread so the population keeps sustaining the lifestyle of the Administration's
agents.
Dr. What wrote to Boraxman <=-
@MSGID: <60143B0E.42579.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-
Scandinavia is as Capitalist as any other Capitalist country.
Government spending isn't Socialism. Public ownership of the means of production is.
You need to get educated on "socialism" if you think it's only about public ownership.
By the way, the government is like a big company.
Then how do we fire the unelected, unappointed bureaucrats in our gov't who set the rules?
We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.
Dream Master wrote to Nightfox <=-
Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.
Like everything else in American politics, if someone in power
says it, it must be true. Obama was born in Hawaii, McCain born
on a US base, and Cruz was born in Canada. Who cares. I think
the "natural born Citizen" clause of the Constitution is flawed.
If you've lived here since childhood and are an American citizen (naturalized), that's good enough for me.
You libs would like to gut the Constitution to better suit your
agenda, but it's not gonna happen. The founders foresaw the likes of
you. It's the only thing between you and tyranny, and you don't even realize it.
Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you
have to ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not s re why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizen and moved back to the US at an early
age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if
they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w nted to.
I think it goes back to allegiances to other countries. They didn't want anyone who might have one, especially to the British.
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
You libs would like to gut the Constitution to better suit your
agenda, but it's not gonna happen. The founders foresaw the likes of
you. It's the only thing between you and tyranny, and you don't even realize it.
See, that's where you're wrong. I completely support the
Constitution and wish it would be upheld in its entirety.
- The right of the people to keep and bear Arms -- I completely
support this. Everyone should be able to own guns with a
stipulation.
If you're a felon or have been accused or prosecuted for domestic violence, or have a mental illness, than you shouldn't be able to
own a gun.
- Denial or disparaging others -- Again, the government shouldn't
infringe upon my personal rights including the right to an
abortion.
So, where am I disagreeing? I'm not. I believe in our Bill of
Rights. Do you?
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to NIGHTFOX on Fri Jan 29 2021 06:44 pm
Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you
have to ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not s re why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizen and moved back to the US at an early
age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if
they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w nted to.
I think it goes back to allegiances to other countries. They didn't wan anyone who might have one, especially to the British.
I can understand that. But for someone who came to the US as a child or immediately after being born, it seems rather unlikely they would have stron alliances with other countries. Someone born in the US could even decide to switch sides at some point.
Nightfox
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.
I know know where you live, but here there is a principle of
"Responsible government" (
In a nutshell a elected member of parliament (whatever if he's an mp, minister, prime-minister) is accountable legally for he's action and decision, but also for the department they represent or are responsible for.
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
On 2021-01-29 10:10 a.m., Dr. What wrote:
Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of people
Yet it seem to show that in country where it's supposed to be run more efficiently by private company it doesn't get cheaper like it would be initially thought.
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
That's partly because of price controls in other countries.
If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.
But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.
Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?
Remember Martin Shkreli?
What I find odd is that here price of medication is cheaper and
contrary to what people in the US know, it's not covered by healthcare. People pays for it, so either you buy an insurance to cover them or
it's out of your pockets. But now some province force you into theirs
plan if you don't have one from your work ect. We do manufacture
locally and do research, Montreal is still see as hub in biomedical research. How come it get to be less expensive? Not that much price fixing.
Not in the U.S. Gov't officials have legal immunity for their decisions. Bureaucrats in agencies
like the EPA, for example, are unelected and unappointed. It's near impossible
to fire them. They are more
likely to die or retire than be fired.
One of the things I already pointed out was the price controls in other countries - which will make
certain drugs and procedures cost less there, but will make it more expensive in countries without
price controls.
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
Not in the U.S. Gov't officials have legal immunity for their decisions. Bureaucrats in agencies
like the EPA, for example, are unelected and unappointed. It's near impossible
to fire them. They are more
likely to die or retire than be fired.
Then you can really call that a democracy :-(
Make me think of EU where is more and more ruled and regulated by
mostly non elected people that will dictate with theirs "directive" law that need to be adopted by respective EU countries.
How long will this last? Look that stunt this weekend with UK. OH we
have a deal but we'll suspend it. Already sound like the big guys
kicking the small ones.
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-expensive
One of the things I already pointed out was the price controls in other countries - which will make
certain drugs and procedures cost less there, but will make it more
in countries without
price controls.
Most of the time it's for generic medication out of patent.
In a way this system has been going on for years in many countries, it look sustainable.
En> Make me think of EU where is more and more ruled and regulated by
En> mostly non elected people that will dictate with theirs "directive" law
En> that need to be adopted by respective EU countries.
I thought that was the main reason the UK wanted out of the EU.
The company who makes the medicine has a choice:
1. Don't sell it in that country.
2. Sell it for $2/pill in that country, but sell it for $8/pill in countries without price controls.
If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will be able to afford the $2/pill any more.
If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will be able to afford the $2/pill any more.
Do you have evidence to prove this claim?
In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend
the most on healthcare per person are:
United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
...
I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual
citizens pay for their own healthcare, or does that also
account for what the government pays in countries where
healhcare is socialized?
Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they
don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the R&D and
overhead costs. Nothing is free.
Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are
trying to reduce or eliminate the government programs and
convert them to private.
They should consult with Greece to see what happens when a
government tries to ween the citizens off of the teet.
Oh, ya. They admit it's hard and it will take a LONG time.
Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.
If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.
But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.
Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?
Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of
people
Yet it seem to show that in country where it's supposed to be run more efficiently by private company it doesn't get cheaper like it would be initially thought.
Part of the reason it costs more here is that we are footing the bill for other countries to have socialized medicine. Like, we pay extra to cover
the R&D and effectively subsidize the health care in other countries.
If we ever socialize ours, there are going to be some countries who are
going to have to start charging their citizens more (raise their taxes or actually charge them). That gravy train would end.
Like everything else in American politics, if someone in power
says it, it must be true. Obama was born in Hawaii, McCain
born on a US base, and Cruz was born in Canada. Who cares.
I think the "natural born Citizen" clause of the Constitution
is flawed. If you've lived here since childhood and are an
American citizen (naturalized), that's good enough for me.
Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-
I thought that was the main reason the UK wanted out of the EU.
It was, and I surprised that others member of the union are OK with
that (directives from above).
Dumas Walker wrote to DR. WHAT <=-
The company who makes the medicine has a choice:
1. Don't sell it in that country.
2. Sell it for $2/pill in that country, but sell it for $8/pill in countries without price controls.
If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will
be able to afford the $2/pill any more.
Dumas Walker wrote to DREAM MASTER <=-
Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the
R&D and overhead costs. Nothing is free.
"Just give up some of your rights and give us more power and we'll
keep you safe." is what they are told. But they forget the rights
they've already given up for safety and never gotten any safety - only
more tyranny.
Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.
R&D is dwarfed by marketting expenses and even production is often
higher than the R&D budgets.
Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the R&D and overhead costs. Nothing is free.
Socialists don't understand economics. If they did, they wouldn't be socialists.
But this has been planned for generations now. The dumbing down of the schools, which produces people who can't think for themselves. We have
too many people who are, mentally, children and feel a *need* to be
dependant on someone.
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
Absolutely not.
Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals to control its investment is insane.
The current system where the government places
Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is
Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
Absolutely not.
Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals
to control its investment is insane. The current system where
the government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is insufficient based upon how the government currently borrows from the trust. Placing Social
Security funds into something akin to the market, but giving zero
control to participants, would demonstrate our governments desire
to watch American industry grow at the same time as giving its
citizens the impetus to work hard for a good retirement.
Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-
The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.
So, my father, who immigrated to the US in the late 40s as
Stateless is less of an American than you or I? He is a citizen
of the United States, has held TS and TS/C level clearances, yet
can't be president because of the natural born clause? He has
zero foreign conflicts of interest or interference. But, since I
was born in the United States, I can become president. I have
zero history as an American. Hell, when someone asks me my
heritage, I respond, "Euro-Trash".
Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?
He's not "less of an American", no. He's just not eligible to become President, by law.
You don't actually KNOW for certain that he has no foreign conflicts. No offense intended by that statement, but it's true.
Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you o member of your family go to school, don't take any federal subsidized studen loans. Oh, and the roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.
anybody that trusts the government to manage their money is a fucking idiot. ey take and take and take and it's never enough.
Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?
I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where healthcare, retirem
t, education, and basic income are part of living in America. You can sit the
thinking that it's communism, it's not. We have more than enough money to ba
out large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure the rich ep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care about them.
You don't actually KNOW for certain that he has no foreign conflicts. No offense intended by that statement, but it's true.
He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?
I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.
We have more than enough money to bail out
large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure
the rich keep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care
about them.
So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.
I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.
Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.
He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.
If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.
Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school, don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.
I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.
Sure it is. None of those items above are anything that anybody is "entitled" to. That's where you commies (Democrats) get it wrong. They are things to strive for, to work hard for, to plan for, and to hopefully achieve. They're not promised or guaranteed, and that's how it should be.
We have more than enough money to bail out
large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure
the rich keep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care
about them.
You describe the Democrat party quite well. Especially the part about sending money overseas, and wasting it on freeloaders/abusers.
So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.
Not just in "my eyes". Just a simple fact.
I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.
So do I. So does everybody. What's your point here? That we're squandering our tax revenue? I do agree with that.
Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take
unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.
Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things for decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.
What you prefer, as a communist, is that *OTHERS* pay for moochers and dirtbags. Everyone should be EQUALLY poor, right? Meanwhile the elite ruling class lives high on the hog. That's what you want?
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things
decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.
So, stop paying your taxes. Stop using everything the government secures for you going forward.
Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure
my neighbors can live.
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.
Sure it is. None of those items above are anything that anybody is "entitled" to. That's where you commies (Democrats) get it wrong. They
are things to strive for, to work hard for, to plan for, and to hopefully achieve. They're not promised or guaranteed, and that's how it should be.
Why should I work for healthcare?
What happens if I become unemployed and need healthcare or one of my children? Just wither away and die? That's the position you are taking.
Healthcare should be a right, not something we should pay through
the roof for to hope they'll pay the bills. This isn't a
communist or socialist thing, this is a "living" thing. People
should go into debt to stay healthy.
Strive, work hard, plan, hopefully achieve? Wow, how do you live
with yourself?
Life shouldn't be about paying medical bills after medical bills and insurance and more and more just to get to Point C.
So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.
Not just in "my eyes". Just a simple fact.
I'm hoping you learn more about the differences between
Democratic Socialism, Socialism, Communism, and fascism.
I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.
So do I. So does everybody. What's your point here? That we're
squandering our tax revenue? I do agree with that.
Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take
unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.
Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things for decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.
So, stop paying your taxes. Stop using everything the government
secures for you going forward.
What you prefer, as a communist, is that *OTHERS* pay for moochers and dirtbags. Everyone should be EQUALLY poor, right? Meanwhile the elite ruling class lives high on the hog. That's what you want?
Who cares? The entire Bible Belt and South is some of the
poorest states in the country--and they all vote Republican. How
can we fix this? Stop calling people moochers and dirtbags and
treat people equally.
Oh, well, you'll never get it.
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle
class.
I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live. Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.
If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.
My father is an American. He served in the USAF and is a Naturalized citizen.
Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-
Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
Unfortunately, nobody in a position to actually propose said
changes has the backbone to do so, and fewer still would vote
for it for fear of backlash and misinformation.
Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-
On 1/29/2021 8:13 AM, Dr. What wrote:
If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.
Not really,
the highest expense of drug companies by a massive margine is advertising,
They're not covering anything, if they couldn't make money in those
other countries, they wouldn't be selling. It's purely economically driven.
What I'd like to see in this country is a reduction of Patents issued,
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
Why should I work for healthcare?
What happens if I become unemployed and need healthcare or one of mychildren?
Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.
Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-
Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals to
control its investment is insane.
The current system where the
government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014)
Placing Social Security funds into something
akin to the market, but giving zero control to participants, would demonstrate our governments desire to watch American industry grow at
the same time as giving its citizens the impetus to work hard for a
good retirement.
He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.
If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.
My father is an American. He served in the USAF and is a Naturalized citizen.
You are the one that said he "is truly Stateless," not me.
Dumas Walker wrote to DREAM MASTER <=-
The US government spends more on health care, per person, than any
other country.
Denn wrote to Dream Master <=-
Socialism and communism are scary, they take away what made America
great (Competition) and makes the Leftist eliteist's richer and richer while greatly reducing the middle class.
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class. Your logic dosen't work in the real world.
Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.
Food-insecure working-poor families with kids? Less nutrition, lower health, fewer economic opportunities and a self-perpetuating circle.
Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-
Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.
Agreed, it makes sense when you think of your community holistically. Makes sense financially when medical/mental health care is treated proactively instead of being treated by an ER visit or a cop with a taser.
Food-insecure working-poor families with kids? Less nutrition, lower health, fewer economic opportunities and a self-perpetuating circle.
... Remove ambiguities and convert to specifics
I was just listening to Dave Ramesy yesterday about when to take retirement.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Without going into all the details, the recommendation is this:
1. Take Social Security at 62 - and take the lower monthly check.
2. Keep working.
3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.
4. Retire later (like 68).
The amount of money you get from the investment account
will ALWAYS be more than enough to cover the difference in
your Social Security check than if you had waited until 68
to start collecting.
Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.
They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more, or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember it.
* SLMR 2.1a * Man, that lightning sounds clos~~ NO CARRIER
---
Synchronet CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.
They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more,
or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember
it.
Vague wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.
They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more, or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember it.
You guys just make stuff up independently before coming here, or
is this your fantasyland brainstorming session?
Ogg wrote to Dr. What <=-
3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.
What kind would guarantee no losses?
Did Ramesy name any specific investment account?
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary,
and it's largely too late as it is... Should have a
reduction schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades
that require participation in a certified, fiduciary
based retirement program, and offsetting participation/
taxation against Social Security. It will cost more for
about 30-40 years, but could then normalize again.
they love dipping into that money.
i would have been better off with it going into a private
account or something like a 401k. i could probably retire
right now, in fact.
Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.
Absolutely not.
Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals
to control its investment is insane. The current system where
the government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns
approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is insufficient based upon how
the government currently borrows from the trust. Placing Social
Security funds into something akin to the market, but giving
zero control to participants, would demonstrate our governments
desire to watch American industry grow at the same time as
giving its citizens the impetus to work hard for a good retirement.
The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.
So, my father, who immigrated to the US in the late 40s as
Stateless is less of an American than you or I?
He is a citizen of the United States, has held TS and TS/C
level clearances, yet can't be president because of the
natural born clause?
He has zero foreign conflicts of interest or interference.
But, since I was born in the United States, I can become
president. I have zero history as an American. Hell, when
someone asks me my heritage, I respond, "Euro-Trash".
Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-
Tr> On 1/29/2021 8:13 AM, Dr. What wrote:
>
> If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
> gets factored in to the price of the drug.
Tr> Not really,
Yes, really.
Tr> the highest expense of drug companies by a massive margine is advertising,
Not even close. Now, that doesn't mean that SOME companies have a huge adversiting budget for SOME drugs.
But for the most part, it's the creation, testing and certification that costs
the most.
They're not covering anything, if they couldn't make money in those
other countries, they wouldn't be selling. It's purely economically
driven.
Right. Now, if ALL countries have price controls guess what happens?
The drug never gets made.
But the discussion was why costs are higher here in the U.S.
What I'd like to see in this country is a reduction of Patents issued,
Then you will see a drop in innovation and many things just never get created.
The purpose of Patents and the like is to give an economic incentive to people
to create new things.
Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.
Exactly. They would rather take the middle class down than raise the
poor up. Probably because it is easier.
Ogg wrote to Dr. What <=-
3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.
What kind would guarantee no losses?
None. But the gov't doesn't guarantee that it will pay out as it promised either. They've reduced Social Security payouts before.
Remember, the gov't isn't investing your SS money. You pay in, and it goes right back out to pay for current benefits. As the Baby Boomers retire
that means more people getting a payout as the number of people paying
in drops.
Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.
Remember, the gov't isn't investing your SS money. You pay in, and it goes right back out to pay for current benefits. As the Baby Boomers retire that means more people getting a payout as the number of people paying
in drops.
Except that the system is bankrupt, failing and cannot cover those that live over 10 years into Social Security, even if the govt didn't dip
into it. The government cannot be trusted not to dip into said funds. It's better placed under more direct control over those that it should benefit. It could be withdrawn/matched under the current structures
used for Social Security currently and be required, and still work
better than it does.
Social Security requires a larger population each generation, which
works against reducing human impact on the environment.
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
@MSGID: <60228F74.1178.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6020B19F.3933.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dumas Walker on
Sun Feb 07 2021 09:01 pm
Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.
I believe what you are saying is a poor mischaracterization of the Democrat Party goal. Why can't we level the playing field? Why can't
we bring up the poor and bring down the rich? Why should multi-millionaires command more authority in this country than that of
the lower to middle class? How much money is too much, how little
money is too little? Leveling the playing field allows all of us to
have a say in our government process, a say in how we live, and a say
in how we ensure everyone is protected.
Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-
@MSGID: <6022947B.1184.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6021BACB.4826.dove-debate@roughneckbbs.com>
Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Tracker1 to Dream Master on
Mon Feb 08 2021 03:27 pm
Except that the system is bankrupt, failing and cannot cover those that live over 10 years into Social Security, even if the govt didn't dip
into it. The government cannot be trusted not to dip into said funds.
It's better placed under more direct control over those that it should benefit. It could be withdrawn/matched under the current structures
used for Social Security currently and be required, and still work
better than it does.
Thinking about this, you're definitely convincing me. Social Security will become insolvent over the next ten years and that will be bad for
a lot of us born in the late 60s and early 70s. I'm going to do some
more research on this line of thinking. Thank you.
Social Security requires a larger population each generation, which
works against reducing human impact on the environment.
Agreed. The population growth in America has definitely broke the
system that was intended to provide us income in our retirement.
Boraxman wrote to Dream Master <=-
Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-
@MSGID: <60228F74.1178.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6020B19F.3933.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dumas Walker on
Sun Feb 07 2021 09:01 pm
Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.
I believe what you are saying is a poor mischaracterization of the Democrat Party goal. Why can't we level the playing field? Why can't
we bring up the poor and bring down the rich? Why should multi-millionaires command more authority in this country than that of
the lower to middle class? How much money is too much, how little
money is too little? Leveling the playing field allows all of us to
have a say in our government process, a say in how we live, and a say
in how we ensure everyone is protected.
We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech
in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them
terrorists.
Their party goal is clearly, judging from their actions, the
maintenance of a liberal world order and the reign of a elite
consisting of those already rich and powerful.
When I judge a political party, I don't look at what they put on the label, but rather the contents of the bottle, which is usually
something completely different.
We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.
Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-
I'm not suggesting price controls, only constraints that ensure some
level of licensure and competition.
Oh, you mean like lack of patents on software prevented software from being written?
Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-
Exactly. They would rather take the middle class down than raise the
poor up. Probably because it is easier.
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Dream Master on Tue Feb 09 2021 11:06 pm
We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.
Where is the world going? It isn't going the route of fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processes, traditional data centers, to name a few. Big Tech, believe, is a mischaracterisation of modern business practices. Changing th way we do (things, processes, methods) is the only way to advance in the wor Continuing our focus on traditional models is only going to hurt and not hel us.
Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS
Oh, you mean like lack of patents on software prevented software from being written?
Software is covered under copyright.
If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.
Dream Master wrote to Boraxman <=-
@MSGID: <6023EF41.1224.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <60232C2A.20313.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Dream Master on
Tue Feb 09 2021 11:06 pm
We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.
Where is the world going? It isn't going the route of fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processes, traditional data centers, to name a
few. Big Tech, I believe, is a mischaracterisation of modern business practices. Changing the way we do (things, processes, methods) is the only way to advance in the world. Continuing our focus on traditional models is only going to hurt and not help us.
Arelor wrote to Dr. What <=-
What you do is to develop $thing.
Then you rent $thing or offer the services of $thing without disclosing how it works (or often, that you even have it).
This is how many powerful industrial sectors have been operating, including electric power generation. A lot of hardware in certain powerplants is not the property of the powerplant, but it is leased,
and nobody but the leaser knows how it works inside.
With software, we are going to get the same thing. Instead of having an office program in your computer, you will be renting it and running it from some cloud system, and only the service operator will have a copy
of the software or know how it works.
I don't think copyright or patent laws matter *that much* when it comes
to industrial applications, but lacking a semblance of them would put
more tech development in the underground.
Arelor wrote to Dream Master <=-
If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent
stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.
Dr. What wrote to Arelor <=-
@VIA: VERT/DMINE
@MSGID: <6026ABA7.42968.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <6024311B.4058.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
Arelor wrote to Dream Master <=-
If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent
stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.
That's why Lefties are always so angry: Reality refuses to go along
with their false Narrative.
| Sysop: | neur0mancer |
|---|---|
| Location: | Colorado Springs, CO |
| Users: | 24 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 229:44:33 |
| Calls: | 280 |
| Messages: | 61,611 |