You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #234: It's a little scary how much we agree... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-03-07 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #230
234. It's a little scary how much we agree...
Edited on Sun Jun-03-07 07:20 PM by Flatulo
> Do you support ending the US governments economic boycott of Cuba? I do.

Absolutely. Makes no sense at all. Besides, I really would like to get my hands on some of those Cuban Partagas cigars. The Dominicans just can't quite get the recipe right.

Seriously, I believe in free but fair trade, as in, the other guy has to do more than take our wealth and send us $29 DVD players and poisened pet food, ala China. We should give trade preferences to nations who pay their citizens a living wage, based on the local market, and honor accepted environmental regulations. It will cost the American consumer more, but in the long run we'll have a healthier economy with a strong middle class. Plus, without regulation, resources get exhausted and the environment gets trashed. I want my kids to be able to enjoy some of the bounty of this land.

> I'm a social libertarian and an economic socialist/mixed market person.

I'd have to agree on the first part. I am very strongly pro-choice, and favor equal rights, and I mean every right, for all citizens regardless of ... anything. Over the years I have moderated my Libertarian hands-off market approach because it simply does not seem to work well in real life. Too much wealth accumulates into little clusters. The best ideas do not get to market because of monopolies. The middle class is being eradicated as jobs flow to the far east in search of ever cheaper shit that we don't need in the first place.

> It's pretty obvious to me that pure socialism and pure capitalism don't work very well.

Agreed again. The European welfare state model has produced unemployment rates and tax burdens that would be unpalatable here. I think France hovers around 20%, and at 50% for young workers. I believe that if you are physically and mentally able to work and work is available, you should not be guaranteed too comfortable an existence courtesy of other taxpayers. I believe in a social safety net, but not free everything for life for the able.

> I oppose the privatization of clearly societal functions, such as the criminal justice system, the
> military, and critical utilities/infrastructure (I'm not talking cable here) I believe that in certain
> cases free enterprise works better and in other cases democratic socialism works better.

> For instance, I support single payer fee for service universal health care. It blends the socialistic
> concept of insurance, with the free enterprise concept of private doctors, hospitals, drug companies,
> medical supply companies, and patient choice of provider.

No argument here. All other considerations aside, it is almost certain to just be less expensive.

> i also believe that any government mandated insurance (such as auto liability) should be offered through a
> single payer government run insurance pool. Pay at the pump would be the easiest, and most efficient way to
> go. If one has gas in their gas tank, they by definition are covered for basic liability. Problem drivers
> should be handled though licensing/ticketing/criminal justice instead of through insurance premium
> penalties.

All good ideas.

> I'm for combining the best aspects of socialism with the best aspects of capitalism and for minimizing the > worst aspects of socialism and the worst aspects of capitalism.

> I'm also in favor of a Democratic Republic as opposed to an Empire (what we have now) or a pure democracy,
> something we've have never had or attempted.

There is a danger of a direct participatory democracy, called Tyranny of the Majority. I am not aware of any direct democracies. There would have to be very strong constitutional protections.


Re: empire - the US has a military presence in 129 countries at last count. That is completely unacceptable. There are geostrategic places where it can be argued that a military presence is needed to prevent crazy people from blowing up resources that the industrial world needs to survive, but really, should we still be in Japan, Germany and Korea?

Thanks for the detailed reply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC