The Terrible Hypocrisy of England and America ın Geopolitics

[Gandalf]

miles, the motivation produced by socialism is one that reduces productivity. Where people are rewarded for doing the bare minimum. Capitalism rewards those who work hard and strive to achieve new heights. If you looked at Socialism through the lens of Behavioral Psychology then you might understand how bad it is for humanity.

Lyle, I advocate socialist policies not communism. There is a massive distinction between the two. I fear your educational system has left you somewhat bereft between thy lugholes.

[El Kabong]

Then by all means miles, explain to me how socialist policies are so great for everyone

[Gandalf]

Then by all means miles, explain to me how socialist policies are so great for everyone

A free health care system is available for all. If you are rich and really think private is better then go private, but an NHS system in its traditional format is really rather good.

Socialism allows choice, but offers a fall back option for all.

The same goes for all of these things. I grew up on the NHS, I survived. I grew up in the comprehensive school system, I was great.

You study hard, you get the grades. You get sick, you go to hospital and don't pay.

What's wrong with that?

[El Kabong]

Then by all means miles, explain to me how socialist policies are so great for everyone

A free health care system is available for all. If you are rich and really think private is better then go private, but an NHS system in its traditional format is really rather good.

Socialism allows choice, but offers a fall back option for all.

The same goes for all of these things. I grew up on the NHS, I survived. I grew up in the comprehensive school system, I was great.

You study hard, you get the grades. You get sick, you go to hospital and don't pay.

What's wrong with that?

The idea that it's "free" is what's wrong with it miles and you know it

[Gandalf]

Then by all means miles, explain to me how socialist policies are so great for everyone

A free health care system is available for all. If you are rich and really think private is better then go private, but an NHS system in its traditional format is really rather good.

Socialism allows choice, but offers a fall back option for all.

The same goes for all of these things. I grew up on the NHS, I survived. I grew up in the comprehensive school system, I was great.

You study hard, you get the grades. You get sick, you go to hospital and don't pay.

What's wrong with that?

The idea that it's "free" is what's wrong with it miles and you know it

It is free to those at the point of use. You will get immediate diagnosis of your problem.

Mind you, the UK is becoming increasingly Americanized. I was still registered with my practice this summer and received a prescription that cost me 35 pounds. I asked to be referred to a psychologist. They said they would try, but really private was the only option. I was rejected by the NHS. They gave me whatever drugs I wanted, but the care I wanted was completely ignored. I got no help.

[El Kabong]

It is free to those at the point of use. You will get immediate diagnosis of your problem.

Mind you, the UK is becoming increasingly Americanized. I was still registered with my practice this summer and received a prescription that cost me 35 pounds. I asked to be referred to a psychologist. They said they would try, but really private was the only option. I was rejected by the NHS. They gave me whatever drugs I wanted, but the care I wanted was completely ignored. I got no help.

I find that extremely hard to believe

[Gandalf]

It is free to those at the point of use. You will get immediate diagnosis of your problem.

Mind you, the UK is becoming increasingly Americanized. I was still registered with my practice this summer and received a prescription that cost me 35 pounds. I asked to be referred to a psychologist. They said they would try, but really private was the only option. I was rejected by the NHS. They gave me whatever drugs I wanted, but the care I wanted was completely ignored. I got no help.

I find that extremely hard to believe

Z just to fit in. You people are stupid with your spelling. You can't even spell Mum. What is wrong with you? Mom? It's just stupid. Mom. Mom.Mom. Really? Not Mum. Mum.

At least admit you are from non genocidal nations, says Mum! Oh but you aren't from non genocidal nations.

[El Kabong]

Z just to fit in. You people are stupid with your spelling. You can't even spell Mum. What is wrong with you? Mom? It's just stupid. Mom. Mom.Mom. Really? Not Mum. Mum.

At least admit you are from non genocidal nations, says Mum! Oh but you aren't from non genocidal nations.

Racist!

[brocktonblockbust]

if what Mıles ıs syaıng ıs so----that ıs pretty shıtty ındeed. Lyle doesnt belıeve ıt and I am not sure ıf those events are exactly what transpıred. Mıles can you please verıfy thıs ıs what happebned to you there? Thıs ıs really lookıng Amerıcanızed as you saıd ol boy, and ıf so ıt may be changıng foır the worse for the general pop.

[Gandalf]

Z just to fit in. You people are stupid with your spelling. You can't even spell Mum. What is wrong with you? Mom? It's just stupid. Mom. Mom.Mom. Really? Not Mum. Mum.

At least admit you are from non genocidal nations, says Mum! Oh but you aren't from non genocidal nations.

Racist!

Potentially, but we all know I am not, so don't be mental.

I hate my country, I hate yours, therefore, I am likely more honest than you about this kind of thing.

Plus I can spell Mum, you just write as a retard would. I mean who is more advanced? me or you? Clearly me. Mom? Take some enunciation lessons too, clown.

[Kirkland Laing]

Britain and America supported Saddam when he gassed the Kurds and supported him right up until he upset another dictator client of ours. Over the next decade we the n proceeded to enforce crippling sanctions on Iraq which killed a million people, most of them children. We then invaded Iraq and killed a hundred thousand more people. And we wondered why the Arab world were disgusted with us and called us genocidal mass murderers after we'd done all this humanitarian intervention for them.

.....this looks suspiciously like one of those retarded Liberal "Blame America first" arguments.


I guess if the US & England had just gotten rid of Saddam earlier then we would be loved? No? Maybe if we kept Saddam longer we would be ok over there? No? Well maybe if we rebuilt their country we would be seen in a better light? No? Well maybe if we gave them top teir trade status? No?.....are you getting the "no matter what we do they won't like us" vibe yet Give them money & they hate us, don't give them money & they hate us, keep their leader & they hate us, get rid of their leader & they hate us.....any of that getting through

I think people in the Middle East are generally pissed off with America because America has propped up basically every dictator and tyrant in the region for decades. If you were living under Saudi rule for instance you may be so angry with America that you fly a plane into a building.

[El Kabong]

I think people in the Middle East are generally pissed off with America because America has propped up basically every dictator and tyrant in the region for decades. If you were living under Saudi rule for instance you may be so angry with America that you fly a plane into a building.

They're still pissed off about the fucking crusades there too Kirkland. It's not America's fault that people we are friends with abuse their power, I mean what's the solution to that problem? We throw out people who will at least not bomb us because they abuse their power and what are we left with? A population where 100% of the people hate America.....don't be simple Kirkland.


Also if the Middle Easterners REALLY wanted to be pissed off at a country they should be pissed off at England....you guys have been fucking about in that part of the world for waaaaay longer than the US has, infact you guys INVITED the United States to help put the Shah back in power in Iran....thanks England, that worked well.....twats

[brocktonblockbust]

Lyle stop blındly defendıng America -- we know you are American

[VictorCharlie]

Whether a nation or several have a socialist system for a particular service does not make your statement "only socialism can motivate good social policies. Capitalism has shown it can't" factual. Of course it is coercive. If a UK citizen decided they were not going to use any NHS services would they be allowed to keep the portion of their taxes that pay into it? Absolutely not. Generally speaking you don't have to force people to go along with a good idea.

In order for proper and effective change to come about you cannot rely on the private market. The market would sooner destroy the planet in the pursuit of short term gains. Green energy has been largely stimulated by government investment and by giving breaks and incentives to the private markets. This is socialist, it brings about the greater good for all. Look at many major economies, the governments pick and choose the winners. It is largely for the greater good of the economy and certainly so in the case of developing America and Korea. Government intervention of that nature is a form of socialism.

In the case of the NHS, I don't think any rational person would argue against it and if you did then you would likely enough be able to afford your private healthcare. You should still pay into it though as you are a citizen and it is moral obligation to pay into it. Why would you object? That is a selfish way to think. Likewise, why would you object to your taxes paying for state schools. If you have enough to educate your kids privately then cool, but again it seems to be a terribly selfish motive to not want to create a more level playing field for all. Is it not patriotic to support your fellow countrymen? The selfish gene is something I don't get politically. It is anathema to me.

We all pay taxes and most of us are paying for healthcare or pensions in some way or another. Let us just eradicate taxation altogether and use the experiment to see where it takes us. Do you think that would work? You have made a living paid for by taxes, my living is partly subsidized by taxes. A million British people protested the Iraq war and still paid for it. There are good and bad forms of taxation. Health and education are such peaceful and beneficial means of taxation. We don't want to surrender all that we earn, but we see the greater good. On the whole those taxes, those subsidizers of socialism, are decent and humane. Things like homeland security, wars and military bases are just fascistic. They seem pretty coerced to me and meanwhile schools go short.

Give me good old socialism any day of the week, it isn't perfect, but neither is fascism. But freedom also means being allowed to survive a brain tumor without selling your house.

Actually most of the great innovation in the world is done through the private sector not public. Green energy does have large amounts of government subsidies and our return is abject failure. Government's picking the winners and losers makes you the citizen almost always the loser. The fact that you are advocating the government to pick economic winners/losers just shows your hypocrisy considering how you rail against corporations and banks.

You would never point a gun at me and steal my money to pay for your healthcare or school so why do you feel it is ok to empower agents of the government to do so? You can pat yourself on the back all day about how great your system is but in the end it is predicated on coercion and the threat of violence against your fellow man. The decent and humane thing is to make society voluntary not coercive.

[Gandalf]

Whether a nation or several have a socialist system for a particular service does not make your statement "only socialism can motivate good social policies. Capitalism has shown it can't" factual. Of course it is coercive. If a UK citizen decided they were not going to use any NHS services would they be allowed to keep the portion of their taxes that pay into it? Absolutely not. Generally speaking you don't have to force people to go along with a good idea.

In order for proper and effective change to come about you cannot rely on the private market. The market would sooner destroy the planet in the pursuit of short term gains. Green energy has been largely stimulated by government investment and by giving breaks and incentives to the private markets. This is socialist, it brings about the greater good for all. Look at many major economies, the governments pick and choose the winners. It is largely for the greater good of the economy and certainly so in the case of developing America and Korea. Government intervention of that nature is a form of socialism.

In the case of the NHS, I don't think any rational person would argue against it and if you did then you would likely enough be able to afford your private healthcare. You should still pay into it though as you are a citizen and it is moral obligation to pay into it. Why would you object? That is a selfish way to think. Likewise, why would you object to your taxes paying for state schools. If you have enough to educate your kids privately then cool, but again it seems to be a terribly selfish motive to not want to create a more level playing field for all. Is it not patriotic to support your fellow countrymen? The selfish gene is something I don't get politically. It is anathema to me.

We all pay taxes and most of us are paying for healthcare or pensions in some way or another. Let us just eradicate taxation altogether and use the experiment to see where it takes us. Do you think that would work? You have made a living paid for by taxes, my living is partly subsidized by taxes. A million British people protested the Iraq war and still paid for it. There are good and bad forms of taxation. Health and education are such peaceful and beneficial means of taxation. We don't want to surrender all that we earn, but we see the greater good. On the whole those taxes, those subsidizers of socialism, are decent and humane. Things like homeland security, wars and military bases are just fascistic. They seem pretty coerced to me and meanwhile schools go short.

Give me good old socialism any day of the week, it isn't perfect, but neither is fascism. But freedom also means being allowed to survive a brain tumor without selling your house.

Actually most of the great innovation in the world is done through the private sector not public. Green energy does have large amounts of government subsidies and our return is abject failure. Government's picking the winners and losers makes you the citizen almost always the loser. The fact that you are advocating the government to pick economic winners/losers just shows your hypocrisy considering how you rail against corporations and banks.

You would never point a gun at me and steal my money to pay for your healthcare or school so why do you feel it is ok to empower agents of the government to do so? You can pat yourself on the back all day about how great your system is but in the end it is predicated on coercion and the threat of violence against your fellow man. The decent and humane thing is to make society voluntary not coercive.

Korea would never have developed had the government not taken it by the reigns and carefully chosen the most effective ways to grow. Samsung and LG dominate because of the support they were given by governmental policy. These corporations dominate the entire globe now. The same means of growth is true of many countries, including America. Where did the Internet come from? Apple? Microsoft? No, your very own military industrial complex. Plenty of innovation comes from government sponsored means.

Picking winners doesn't mean you lose if you have a job and are putting food on the table. In fact, modern economies with high unemployment are proof that unchecked corporatism means that jobs are gone and won't be coming back. Governments can protect an economy for the greater good of all. When we talk of banks too, we should also point out the deregulation that caused the crisis. You need government control. Personally, I am in favour of a nationalised banking system.

In terms of your view on healthcare, you pay taxes, you pay private firms money for healthcare coverage, what is so different a nationalised health care system? At least that is avoiding the profit motive of the private firm. You are anti government influence, but your entire career has been based on state subsidization. That is what I see as hypocritical and contradictory. If you really were against governments being involved with things, then you would never work for them or use their services. It sounds cool to be anti government, but in practice nobody is.