|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » Who will win the 2012 US Presidential Election?

Default Who will win the 2012 US Presidential Election?

May 11th, 2012, 04:54
I suspect you may think that I'm some how arguing its something more benign sounding than being socialistic but that is the opposite of what I suggest.

Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
And, if we're going to dig out our textbooks here and impress each other, I'd say you could make a fairly convincing argument that ObamaCare isn't that far from Webster-approved socialism. While the government would not technically own the means of production, by controlling all payments made within it the government would have an incredible amount of control upon those means. I believe control of means of production satisfies the textbook definition of socialism, yes?
This is more of a government regulated and facilitated cartel and they don't control the payments but rather just insist that they be made to one of the limited corperations whose market positions are, in part, ensured by aspects of the mandate and the inherited regulatory and legal system surrounding them. This sort of close relationship between a cartel of private corperations whose place in the market is enforced by the requirement to buy and fairly strong barriers to market entry (both natural and regulatory) is very reminscent of corperate statism - whose more familiar synonym would serve as a distraction due to the weight of history associated with it. As thrasher pointed out, what I am referring to is effectively a tenet of fascism.

I would be far less unhappy with acctual socialized medicine for all the difficulties it entails. What the mandate makes this though is almost the worst of both the worlds of government intrusion and plutocratic crony capitalism. It turns out that the worst of both worlds in this case sounds a little like facism. It's like an anti-compromise.

Obama care as envisioned though? Well single payer would be full on socialized medicine of some flavor and yeah that would be an accurate description. A public option would have probably been a more honest "compromise" because it could have failed or succeeded on its own merits. That's why both sides ended up shying away from it; the proponents of universal care of some sort had good reason to fear it would fail, the insurance interests had good reason to fear it would succeed, and republicans had reason to believe it would fail eventually but oppose it on principle. So that is why we have neither socialized medicine or an honest compromise between socialized and market driven insurance; what we have is this anti-compromise which is not accurately socialist or market capitalist in nature but more reminiscent of "corporate statism" elements of fascism and feels antithetical to both.
Last edited by jhwisner; May 11th, 2012 at 05:09.
jhwisner is offline

jhwisner

SasqWatch

#401

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,549

Default 

May 11th, 2012, 05:07
Fair enough. You're putting far more emphasis on the line between the insurance companies and the government than I. Functionally, I'm convinced that the insurance companies will be nothing more than a privatized administration arm of the government plan. They won't be making any decisions on their own, just writing whatever checks the government tells them to write. Basically, still government, but outsourced. If you don't see that line as blurred to nonexistence, then I would agree with your "corporate statism" analysis.

And really, code-wise the line does exist, so really I must concede the point if we're going to respect technicalities. I just tend to focus on practical application moreso than letter of the law, which isn't exactly proper "textbook" thinking.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#402

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,380

Default 

May 11th, 2012, 08:27
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
And were we talking European politics, your point would be relevant.
Hey, you asked in what universe socialized medicine was centrist!

Originally Posted by rossrjensen View Post
In the US, this is a subject of debate. At issue for a large number of us is the issue of choice, getting down to our core reverence of liberty.
That's funny, because from the european point of view you need socialized medicine for the poor to have a choice (other than "when I get sick my family thrown out on the streets"). Which says something about the difference in view between Americans and Europeans: you value liberty (less restrictions), we value freedom (more meaningful choices possible). At least that's the impression I've gotten from growing up in Europe and interacting with a lot of Americans.

Übereil

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.

H. L. Mencken

The Chaos Cascade
Ubereil is offline

Ubereil

Ubereil's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#403

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,263

Default 

May 12th, 2012, 01:23
Seems sometimes that here in America, "Freedom" is code for the denial of social responsibility.
Jhari is offline

Jhari

Watchdog

#404

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 192

Default 

May 14th, 2012, 12:48
I won't support obama, since he did nothing to US economic. But I have the feeling that he might win the second term.

Either need to frustrate because of the once , or abandon your it truns out that
determination wants to achieve purpose
fengzi597 is offline

fengzi597

fengzi597's Avatar
Watcher

#405

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: earth
Posts: 37

Default 

May 14th, 2012, 19:43
Actually the job growth has improved under Obama. It would have been better without Republicans blocking most measures in Congress. But remember the president has little control over the economy. All he can do is propose and veto. It's Congress that has the most control (well except for the Fed).
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#406

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,413

Default 

May 15th, 2012, 04:30
Here is an interesting potential curve-ball for the election: China-Philippine conflict over Scarborough Shoal breaks into naval warfare.

If the Philippines loses and the US does not intervene, southeast Asian populations, though usually democrat leaning, will likely vote republican.

If the Philippines wins without direct US intervention (or with), southeast Asians will strongly support Obama.

The Chinese vote is largely irrelevant in my understanding because most Chinese living in the US are not sympathetic (often actively antagonistic) the the current Chinese leadership.
staylost is offline

staylost

Watcher

#407

Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 37

Tags
obama, romney, us president
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » Who will win the 2012 US Presidential Election?
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:18.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch