Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Chinese Communist Party.
Peak absurdity of CA gov
- Thread starter Ed Haywood
- Start date
- Status
Ummm... If the two above statements were intended to go together, then no. I think you may have Communism and Socialisem mixed up.
A single-payer healthcare system, which I think is what you'er talking about, is Socialized Medicine. That's where the government finances a system that provides healthcare. It may or may NOT be a government system. It could also be refered to as Democratic Socialism, where the intent is to ensure equal access to basic necessities like healthcare. (Not to be confused at all with ultra liberal Democratic PARTY members.
)Communism is more about OWNING everythig and you get what they decide to give you. It's not at all about "funding" systems like healthcare. (In simplest terms.)
And I have to put my two cents in... We really need to get moving on our sort of common health care which I consider either a Beta or version1.0 at best so we can start saving some money. 80-90% of the WORLDS healthcare works. And sure there are problems, so we take what works and should be looking at what doesn't. But right now you, me and a huge part of the country are just throwing away money in our current system. And that's assuming you're paying for healthcare... If not, you're probably going to the Emergency Room and costing the rest of us a forture.
And before you start screeming I'm an ultra liberal, wrong! I'm trying to save myself money that it being tossed into the toilet. And don't get confused by Social Medicine thinking it that lefty libral crap. It's a "social" system menaing for all, and if done right like I think we could, that will ultimately save us all a lot of money.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
I don't. Please follow the thread to the post I was quoting. Someone else was conflating the two terms. I do appreciate your insight.Ummm... If the two above statements were intended to go together, then no. I think you may have Communism and Socialisem mixed up.
A single-payer healthcare system, which I think is what you'er talking about, is Socialized Medicine. That's where the government finances a system that provides healthcare. It may or may NOT be a government system. It could also be refered to as Democratic Socialism, where the intent is to ensure equal access to basic necessities like healthcare. (Not to be confused at all with ultra liberal Democratic PARTY members.
Communism is more about OWNING everythig and you get what they decide to give you. It's not at all about "funding" systems like healthcare. (In simplest terms.)
And I have to put my two cents in... We really need to get moving on our sort of common health care which I consider either a Beta or version1.0 at best so we can start saving some money. 80-90% of the WORLDS healthcare works. And sure there are problems, so we take what works and should be looking at what doesn't. But right now you, me and a huge part of the country are just throwing away money in our current system. And that's assuming you're paying for healthcare... If not, you're probably going to the Emergency Room and costing the rest of us a forture.
Lindberg
Final Approach
Wow. There really are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
I agree. This post seems to describe the government accurately
Lindberg
Final Approach
That post doesn't say anything about the government.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
If you are too blind to see it, I can't help you, Bro.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I read what you quoted about farmer's markets, and I don't see what it has to do with the Chinese government or the CCP, so I guess I'm just blind. It doesn't change the facts though.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
It might help you if you actually clicked on the link. That thing about the farmer's market was quoted by someone else.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I see a quoted post, not a link, but now clicking the post, I see Warmi claiming the Chinese government is totalitarian and fascist, not communist, again, without facts. But neither Warmi's rant nor your anecdotes are persuasive. Certainly not more persuasive than the many sources that agree that state control of the private sector is increasing, not decreasing.
Fused Together: The Chinese Communist Party Moves Inside China’s Private Sector
The Chinese Communist Party has increased its ability to monitor and influence private companies in China through party cells, placements, and investments.
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Almost of those sources you mention will mention the "one child policy" at some point. Yet I know many people there who have siblings born during that period. If such a policy existed, it was only enforced in some areas of China, or otherwise enforced unevenly. My point is that China is rather opaque unless you have been there, or know several people well. I normally would have taken your comments and links at face value except that the western media doesn't have all the correct information.I see a quoted post, not a link, but now clicking the post, I see Warmi claiming the Chinese government is totalitarian and fascist, not communist, again, without facts. But neither Warmi's rant nor your anecdotes are persuasive. Certainly not more persuasive than the many sources that agree that state control of the private sector is increasing, not decreasing.
Fused Together: The Chinese Communist Party Moves Inside China’s Private Sector
The Chinese Communist Party has increased its ability to monitor and influence private companies in China through party cells, placements, and investments.www.cna.org
Your CNA link is the only one you've presented that has reasonably accurate information. However, strip away the ominous tones, and you see a private entity getting subsidies, and also works with a number of military firms. A totalitarian government can cause a company to alter their investments. However, it doesn't look any worse that the US government holding 10% of Intel, for example.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
Weird, huh?
Lindberg
Final Approach
Your bias is clear, as is your use of straw men, red herrings, and argument by anecdote.
If such a policy existed? You believe that China never had a one-child policy because you know someone with a sibling? I'm flabbergasted. You're either completely unserious, or perhaps intentionally spreading propaganda. Either way, I'm out.
One-child policy - Wikipedia
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
I know many people there with siblings born during that time. That's why I question the extent of the policy. I can't explain the disconnect between what those I have met and your reference. I doubt the Chinese government has all these random people introducing me to their siblings just to make propaganda. Neither am I willing to say "There was no such policy" as there is much evidence to suggest it does.Your bias is clear, as is your use of straw men, red herrings, and argument by anecdote.
If such a policy existed? You believe that China never had a one-child policy because you know someone with a sibling? I'm flabbergasted. You're either completely unserious, or perhaps intentionally spreading propaganda. Either way, I'm out.
One-child policy - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Last edited:
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Yes, they probably don't want to rebrand themselves. I'm no economist, so I probably lack the vocabulary to describe their economic system. The closest terms I might use, without the racism, would be "National Socialism". An authoritarian government, economic cooperation between capital and the government, which includes the government investing or controlling some industries.
[SIGH]... I really have to stop using my phone when I'm on the run. Gotcha now.
Speaking of absurdity: 20 some years ago a Canadian Farmer came down from Alberta and bought all the 50 lb bags of Fargo that CHS had at end of season. Got a good deal as it would have been hold over inventory. He had inquired ahead of time if it could be brought into Canada without duty. Yep. good to gp . Got to the border and it was not allowed in because the bags were not printed in French. Had to buy bags to slip the US bags into before it could cross into Canada. sort of took the savings out of that deal.
If this doesn’t confirm California policy makers are the only source of absurdity, I don’t know what does.
FDA initiates label change on Tylenol to warn of autism
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced Monday it has begun the process of changing the labeling on acetaminophen to suggest that it may cause autism and ADHD in children whose mothers too…
thehill.com
Cap'n Jack
Final Approach
Did you mean to write it that way? I didn't see California mentioned anywhere in the article although I may have missed it. The whole thing started as a federal government thing, not California.If this doesn’t confirm California policy makers are the only source of absurdity, I don’t know what does.
FDA initiates label change on Tylenol to warn of autism
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced Monday it has begun the process of changing the labeling on acetaminophen to suggest that it may cause autism and ADHD in children whose mothers too…thehill.com
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 27,383
- Display Name
- Bob Noel
- Home Airfield
- KBED
I suspect that you have a typo (i.e., missing a word)
It was a poor attempt at sarcasm on my part.
Ed Haywood
Final Approach
You failed to use one the PoA approved methods of indicating this.
Being completely bilingual . . . English and Sarcasm . . . I sometimes get called out by those who are not understanding the difference. In order to be clear, I am looking for pointers on differentiating the two. Some people here use " /s " while I am of the 
school. Is there a convention or norm here or in general?
school. Is there a convention or norm here or in general?
- Status