Recent posts by sanii on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Obama wants to take our guns away, yet again.

I’m not saying americans are horrible! I don’t have anything against americans.

My country is not perfect. I hate my provincial government, and the new federal one has a bunch of promises to fulfil (Also they don’t have a concrete environmental plan, and I think more dentalcare/pills should be covered by the gvt).

And, again, I’ve got nothing against americans, or american culture, or american food.

America is not “bad”.

I’ve simply been pointing out what I believe are flaws in the current gun-laws(in this thread) and medical system (in other threads).

Clean up our backyard? Sure. I’ll be trimming my yard without crippling backpain, because I didn’t have cheap private insurance when I was accidentally shot by a friend and I wasn’t unable to afford physical therapy to recover properly.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Obama wants to take our guns away, yet again.

Originally posted by jhco50:

Why is it liberals always try to make America the bad guys? Why are we constantly bombarded with we need to take your guns cause of your high crime rates? And we are not the worst country for crime. Maybe you liberals should use a bit of logic when you make accusations. America is actually very low when it comes to crime compared to other countries and their gun laws. Most of the countries in the top 10 deny their citizens the right to firearms. Yet with these strict gun laws they have high murder rates. Could it be that more guns mean fewer crimes?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/10/worlds-highest-murder-rates_n_5125188.html

Good job! America is better then formidable, stable nations like Mexico, Nigeria, Egypt and Namibia.

If you look a bit more closely at that map, you’ll see that nearly every single developed country is doing better then the US.

You want liberals to stop making america look like the bad guys? Then stop comparing yourself to the bad guys.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Obama wants to take our guns away, yet again.

Originally posted by jhco50:

Obviously Karma, I do and you don’t. All you have done since being on this forum is push socialism. We used to be the freest country in the world and now that your socialist president has reigned supreme for eight years we don’t even make the top ten on the list. Canada is number one. And it may sty there until people of your ilk get up there.

Dude. How do you define socialism? If by “socialist” you mean “has government programs”, Canada is 3x more socialist then the US. Socialist is no longer a dirty word: you can’t just say "he’s a socialist! and pretend that’s an argument.

The Second Amendment was specifically intended to allow American citizens to own and bear Arms.

Would love a source for that.

I know you would like nothing else than to have conservatives eliminated from kongregate, they blow holes in your socialist ideals and this makes it hard for you to spread your poison. Funny how more and more conservatives speak up against you.

Pretty sure we would all get bored without a spectrum of belief.
Peterhooligan has interesting conservative arguments sometimes.
The forums just don’t like you because your arguments are insane.

Case in point:

Now that we have a socialist/muslim president in office, the democrats have knuckled down on removing guns from the ciizens for the purpose of having the freedom to control them. Yes, control the people who are supposed to be the government. The powers for the federal government are very limited with the states maintaining the bulk of powers. The people are supposed to be the ruling faction here. This is just a brief outline and for those of you who even care should get a copy of the Constitution and study it. I know Karma won’t as he would like to destroy this country. And yes, I would not doubt Obama setting up mass killings to further his agenda. He is a muslim. Do some research.

Rapid fire:

Obama is not left leaning compared to other developed nations.

Democrats are for gun control, I don’t think any mainstream politician has said anything about confiscation.

Federal politicians are just as accountable to the “people” as state or municipal ones. Elections, dude. The federal government has them.

The constitution is online. I’ve read it. I don’t think that all citizens are part of a well regulated milita. I disagree with the supreme court that legitimized the opposite.

Obama is not a muslim.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Obama wants to take our guns away, yet again.

The exact text in the constitution is

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The constitution does not guarantee your right to guns, it guarantees your right to be part of a well regulated militia. All other extrapolations of this passage are the result of how its been interpreted by the politicians. The same court/political system that systematically denied women the right to vote, equality for minorities ect.

Your guns laws are outdated and need to be updated. People with a violent criminal record, and people with severe mental illnesses should not be able to acquire the means to destroy dozens of people almost instantly.

When you say that “The constitution guarantees my right to bear arms! Obama be takin’ our guns!”, what you’re actually saying is “I have no supporting arguments, so I’m going to use meaningless buzzwords”

Look at Canada, We have sane gun-laws that makes both hunters and recreational shooters happy.
http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/12/04/news/how-american-gun-deaths-and-gun-laws-compare-canadas

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gun issues updates

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by beauval:

But you accept mandatory government ordained training before you are allowed to drive a car, fly a plane or pilot a cargo ship into dock. Why are guns so different?

Yes you are right, except for the automobile is not mandatory training. The difference is, what you mention is a privilege in this country, not protected by the Bill of Rights, while a firearm is protected. Having a drivers license can be a fleeting thing, it is only at the whim of government, but a right takes much more to alleviate. This is especially true when it is actually stated in our founding document. Yes, our 2nd Amendment has been infringed upon by those who would like to see a country of sheep.

Why do you hold the constitution up like it’s some sort of divine artifact? Even your own founding fathers conceded that it should be updated as time changes.

If your only argument relies on guns being special simply because they are mentioned in the constitution, and not for any actual reason, then your argument is extremely weak.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Yahoo says Domino's is best pizza

I like Panago the most. I find that the quality degrades after 3+ toppings, but they have the best mushrooms and cheese. I used to love Fresh-slice, but my local Fresh-slice skimps on toppings, so Panago takes the prize.

I’ve never had Papa johns or Pizza hut. Little Caesar is not bad on a budget, since a medium only costs 5$.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by sanii:

Heh. Being from another country does not make her arguments invalid.

:

Yes it does, how would you like it if we come down on Canada and tell you how you should live? You would probably scream to high heaven, but of course it is much easier for you to tell Americans how to live than be on the receiving end.

Lol. If you Americans come up with a great idea we can wrap into our existing system, it would definitely be debated in parliament and judged based on its merits and not nationalism.

As a Canadian:

It works > it being Canadian.

I would take something that works effectively over something “Canadian” any-day. I don’t see why america should be any different.

It seems the LAPD agrees with me, seeing they have recently adopted Canadian training methods.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/los-angeles-police-department-taught-the-canadian-way-when-it-comes-to-using-force-1.3025580
Originally posted by jhco50:

And Vicka, if you really had any feeling for this country, which you have stated you don’t, why aren’t you here instead of “Scotland” (Witch this is the first time you told me this BTW)? If your chosen country is so much better, why do you bother to keep citizenship here? You show nothing but disrespect and hatred for everything American, and yet you hang on to your citizenship. .

I don’t live in the US, but the US is the most important single nation on earth. It becoming better, taking care of its citizens, been stable, and staying the most important is in the best interest of almost everyone on earth. It is perfectly logical why Vika would remain a US citizen and thus be able to be doubly important in world politics. Plus, being a duel citizen makes traveling easier.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by jhco50:

Oh yeah, many of the journalists are predicting Madam Hillary won’t even win the primaries. Sad isn’t it. You could always vote for the socialist who just announced his run. He actually admits to being a socialist. Guess who Karma will probably vote for, LOL.

Heh. Being from another country does not make her arguments invalid.

Originally posted by jhco50:

Oh yeah, many of the journalists are predicting Madam Hillary won’t even win the primaries. Sad isn’t it. You could always vote for the socialist who just announced his run. He actually admits to being a socialist. Guess who Karma will probably vote for, LOL.

Heh. We have us some NDP (socialists) in Canada, and we seem to be doing fine. All your American freedom don’t help you one bit if you:

- get shot by a cop

-government sues your cash

-need healthcare

America no longer needs to fight communists. The cold war is over. You won. Being stuck in a cold war mentality is holding the united states back from the level of progress achieved by both your northern neighbor, and those across the pond.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

@ classic, Links. Please link to sources for the facts you tout. Everything has a wikipedia page, read it, link to it.

Since the thread is pretty derailed up anyway, I’m just say that sexuality in rome is surprisingly interesting. Read the wikipedia page. In certain respects it was extraordinarily similar to modern society, while at the same time being totally insane. Reading on the topic is definitely interesting.

Sexuality in Ancient Rome.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by sanii:

Karma, you failed to draw any concrete comparaisons between the fall of the western ancient romain empire thing* and the States. If you want to go on a tangent, say so clearly so I can adress whatever point you make.

Knock your self out

That’s no fun ):

Plus, 99% of those are comparing the US to the Roman Republic, not the Romain Empire.

Originally posted by classic256:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by classic256:

I do not understand this thread at all. What is the point of discussion?

What is the point of living?
What is the point of being successful?
What is the point of even trying?

I am just trying to understand the direction of this thread.

OP is comparing the fall of the Ancient (western) Romain Empire to the “fall” of the United States of America as a superpower. Then I was all like: “Thats crazy bro” then he was like: “mkay xD”.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

Originally posted by wargamer1000:
Originally posted by sanii:

Edward Gibbon’s history of the decline and fall of the roman empire was published in 1789. That’s quite a while ago. Additional, in its Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire), the “criticisms” section describes how his “morality” theory has run afoul of modern historians. Give a better source then a book written three centuries ago.

I doubt I’d give. Perhaps you think morality at all isn’t a factor for societies and states? I’d like to hear not matters of fact, but your opinion.

I believe morality is an important aspect in a state, being the foundation for its society and laws. That being said, the (western) Romain Empire had much bigger fish eating it then Christianity. Said fish being angry germans, a dying economy, and being abandoned by its other half.

Karma, you failed to draw any concrete comparaisons. If you want to go on a tangent, say so clearly so I can address your argument.

Fo(w)ARE = Fall of the (western) Ancient Romain Empire

EDIT: Thanks for pointing out how to delete my post Vikatea.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

Edward Gibbon’s history of the decline and fall of the roman empire was published in 1789. That’s quite a while ago. Additional, in its Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire), the “criticisms” section describes how his “morality” theory has run afoul of modern historians. Give a better source then a book written three centuries ago.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Two American millennials destroy history in Italy.

Kids in history have never had cheerios and honey in the same bowl. This is a game changer and is the reason you can’t compare this generations cheerios to the original.

Different cheerios, like porn, is not a valid reason to disqualify comparison between demographics.

Woah. You and the OP are one and the same. Did not notice till now. Are you the alt-man? I’m honoured. Its been so long. I remember a Alt-man from like 6 months ago, but thought he had perished.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

You do need sources. Why should I believe what you’re saying if you do not provide sources? I would understand if the arguments provided were purely subjective, but you need sources if you want to state a fact.

“While this ominous warning is often taken very lightly by the majority of the population who believe history is something you learn in school and then forget, it’s near prophetic words are not to be ignored.”

This is a opinion, so no source are needed. You’re not stating any objective “truths” (no solid YES/NO anwser is possible).

“But it is agreed by many people that the most likely reason for the fall of such a powerful empire began from the degradation of one of the most fundamental foundations of any society: morality.”

This is stating a fact: you are stating that “many people (implied to be within historical circles, AKA credible people)” think that “morality” was a factor in the fall of the Roman empire. I don’t believe you. If you want me to believe you, you have to post a credible source.

Plus, only quote the part you want to talk about. Having to scroll down through my entire post is making me depressed. It’s so long D:

Plus, you missed an epic opportunity for a “that’s what she said” joke. I even marked the spot with a “heh”!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ancient Rome and the United States

Originally posted by cromagintwo:

As a history buff I have always found it interesting how past events can parallel the present era. As the old saying goes: Those who don’t learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

While this ominous warning is often taken very lightly by the majority of the population who believe history is something you learn in school and then forget, it’s near prophetic words are not to be ignored.

If you were to ask any good historian why the Roman Empire fell from power you would undoubtedly get several different responses, ranging from political turmoil to unsustainable power. But you would most certainly get several similar answers, which are undisputed by the majority of reputable historians throughout the world.

Reason One

The primary reason for the fall of Rome is hotly debated within historical circles. But it is agreed by many people that the most likely reason for the fall of such a powerful empire began from the degradation of one of the most fundamental foundations of any society: morality.

Because the morality of Rome became so undefined towards its end, a number of social structures were being affected – the number one being family life.

When the family began to break apart in Rome, defined ethics and morality began to decline with it.

Unarguably, when reflecting on American values the traditional family structure is clearly being broken apart by immorality and unethical behavior. Corruption on the highest levels of government are promoting this, while rewarding behavior that works against a well-structured society.

Reason Two

Political corruption is another reason for the fall of such a mighty empire. Political factions had their own agendas, serving their own needs while ignoring the will of the people.

This parallel is extremely obvious when observing American political leaders in office today – ranging from the run of the mill congressional servant to the highest levels of office.

A wise man once said a house divided cannot stand – a truth that speaks volumes.

Reason Three

Continuous wars began to take its toll on the Roman population. People were getting tired of it until their will to fight began to falter.

Over time Rome was stretched to its breaking point and the empire’s people were in a state of apathy. This allowed a super-power to be defeated by simple barbarians, who later would divide the empire completely.

America too has fought wars since its birth. Now the people are starting to become apathetic like the Roman citizens of old.

Reason Four

Because of cheap slave labor and cheap workers from foreign lands, the middle class of Rome began to be pushed into poverty – which is part of the reasons the family life began to degrade.

Eventually a middle class in Rome was virtually non-existent. Taxes stopped flowing in, the military began follow the coin where it was available, and the empire began to see its first fractures in its stability.

If we look at America today we can see a similar event happening. While we no longer have slave labor, employers are paying less and less, immigrants from foreign countries (legal and illegal) are bidding for jobs at much lower pay, while the middle class (the ones who arguably form the foundation of the country) are beginning to break apart.

Eventually only the elite were able to hold seats of power, which again is beginning to be paralleled in America. If you don’t have money to run for office, you might as well turn belly up and quit.

The Conspiracy

Natural disasters, mob mentality, and other reasons also lead to the fall of Rome. But none are more important that the primary four I have listed above.

It would appear to me that those in power today are very aware of the state of the American nation. But their selfish desires and non-compassionate views towards the people of this nation is leading towards America’s fall.

A lack of loyalty to the people of this nation allows our political leaders to sell us down river, while assuring their seats of power.

I cannot help but think these people know exactly what they are doing – and want to degrade the American people so much to the point where we are ready to break. This will ensure that we can never rise up in power to defend ourselves, or take back what belongs to us…. Freedom.

If we as a people continue to ignore the lessons of history, give in to our immoral urges, and don’t begin to use the voices we were given – then like Rome, we will fade into the ashes of history as another failed civilization….

I disagree completely.

Counter Point 1:

A 1/2 second google search for “social problems in the roman empire” reveals no links between the fall of rome and its social structure. The traditional “family” only existed to a limited extent in ancient Rome*. The women and children were legally and socially in a completely different class compared to the patriarch. Unless your father owns you, then modern “quotidienne” society and that of ancient rome are hardly comparable. Even if we shared a common social fondation, the link you (cromagin) drew between family structure and the fall of Rome is extremely tenuous.

Counter Point 2

The Roman bureaucracy was a fucking mess. An emperor would inherit, buy, win, or otherwise procure the throne, and he could do whatever the fuck he wanted. They had some good ones, and some bad ones. But, unlike in american, the next emperor could instantly burn down everything the previous one had built, and plunge the empire into total chaos. American democracy has its faults, but American tyrants only last four years. No civil war necessary. If the American people ever became angry enough that a violent revolution against the current two party system was possible, they could instead (angrily) support a third party candidates. Plus, the current system weeds out the really crazy ones. Mostly.

Counter Point 3

“Continuous wars began to take its toll on the Roman population. People were getting tired of it until their will to fight began to falter. Over time Rome was stretched to its breaking point and the empire’s people were in a state of apathy. This allowed a super-power to be defeated by simple barbarians, who later would divide the empire completely.”

The Roman people stopped supporting the army ‘cause the army couldn’t pay them, not cause they “lost faith”. Rome was out of countries to loot, and thus couldn’t support the highly skilled warriors needed to beat back the Germans, so the Germans beat back the Romans*.
Back in the good ol’ days of Rome, The “technological edge” amounted to two things: who had the better training, and who had the logistics necessary to support a larger army. When Rome lost both, they became just as vulnerable to the “simple barbarians” as the “simple barbarians” had been vulnerable to Rome.

Counter Point 4

The Roman Empire hit a economic crisis ’cause it was OUT of cheap labour. Foreign workers (slaves and freedmen) were the lifeblood of the Roman economy, and when Rome ran out of workers, they ran out of people willing to support the military and carry the economy. The “middle class” AKA people who owned said slaves/ employed the freedmen, naturally did not like this development. Rome responded by raising the taxes to a totally unsustainable level. The Politicians in the US are prone to error, but founding an economy based only on looting Mexico is not one of them.

In conclusions, the arguments you provide to compare the current American nation to the fall of the Western Roman Empire are insufficient to form any possible parallels between the two states. If you want to compare the US to Rome, find better examples.
If you find my argument insufficient, feel free to attempt to poke some holes. I enjoy it as much as you do (heh).

*1 As detailed in this link: http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/family.html

*2 This link also backs up 4: http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/8-reasons-why-rome-fell

TLDR: This is a horrible comparison due to how different the US and Ancient Rome are. Also, no sources given.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tutorial: How to Troll

- deleted, since this post was needlessly negative. Still, I would prefer if people who destroy debates by being totally toxic are banned instead of tolerated.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tutorial: How to Troll

Pete, I believe your definition of the “ultimate troll” is wrong. I think trolling shouldn’t be aimed directly at the “mark”. The ultimate troll is the the puppet master. He is in absolute control at all times. He know what people will type before they do. Eventually, the discussion is morphed, by his will, into a monster of his own creation. Anyone can destroy the OP’s self-esteem. It requires much more skill and creates much more havoc if the troll instead works within the confines of “civility” to achieve his goals.
Jhaco (my example troll), 99% of the time, doesn’t even need to insult someone to gain complete control of the thread. Ten angry people respond to him, and then are forced to wait for his reply. He dominates them simply by being ignorant. Imagine the Ultimate Troll:
No thread is safe from his derailment. We are all but his puppets. Our debates have pre-ordained conclusion, our discussion futile theatrics. By his masterful engineering, the thread becomes completely mangled beyond repair. Above all, we have no idea who he is. He can haunt the halls of SD ’till he is the only survivor.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Perfect example why the USA is broken. ( A must read! )

wut wut!

Looks like a struggling family was able to get out of poverty due to government assistance. Seems like the problem here is not with these programs but with their delivery. Possible a interesting debate, if the people refrain from rage-posts.

EDIT: Read the rest of the OPs responses. All hope is lost.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / [repost]Is Israel's Action In The West Bank Considered Ironic?

Meh. I think Israel is a developed nation beating the shit out of terrorists. That being said, it seems Israel is not really trying to solve the long-term problems in Gaza/West Bank. It’s comparable to Russia conquering Finland, building a bunch of apartments for Russian immigrants, then giving the new Russian neighbors free reign to beat the shit out/ steal from the natives.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Stupid People

[I had a longer response, but I deleted it by accident and I be 2stupid to retype]

In my limited experience, intelligence comes in multiple formes. I may be “intelligent” in history and science, but be a total idiot in terms of french grammar compared to my peers. “Stupid” people are usually intelligent in some other way.

For example, I know a guy who is super aggressive, a bit socially incompetent, and not the best with language. But he’s surprisingly strong and knows martial arts. If someone charged me with a knife, I would take his intelligence (ability to analyze situation quickly, decide how to properly beat the shit out of his opponent, solve problem) over VikaTaes.

OPs girl may not be the smartest academic, but she might be a good grocery-store clerk.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I am damn tired of Obamacare. Now it's time for the correction. :)

If the rich don’t want to contribute back to the government, they can get out of that governments territory and go live somewhere else. Like Somalia. They have no government! No one to take all that hard earned monies! Perfect solution!

The rich don’t pay more taxes, the poor people don’t get a education and end up staying poor. Poor people with a shitty education end up being more violent and stupid. Hence populations with the wealth to support education/ healthcare and other systems to stop people from being poor generally do, so everyone can have more fun (less violence/stupid). Lots of statistics to back this up, will edit them in eventually.

The ethics of taxes are irrelevant; if you really want to discuss the ethics of taxes, start a new thread.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I am damn tired of Obamacare. Now it's time for the correction. :)

Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:
Originally posted by sanii:

Whats wrong with it being “just a transfer of wealth”? In canada, the rich:

A) Accept that using the Canadian education system, roads, emergency services, infrastructure, subsidies, ect, comes with a indirect cost to pay via taxes.

OR

B) Deny that the Canadian government has helped them in any way in amassing their wealth, and avoid paying said taxes (AKA tax fraud).

In canada, group B is almost universally shunned as unethical and arrogant/lazy/cheap.

I respect and appreciate the Canadian healthcare system (or what I know of it), but things traditionally haven’t been done that way in the U.S., for better or worse. There’s really no perfect system. You can pay high taxes and have no concern as to how you get your healthcare coverage (Canada), but I’m sure there’s often longer wait times. On the other hand, in the U.S., you sometimes have to scramble for coverage—and barring any unique donut holes, it’s there—but it’s often more timely when you get it.

Why are people talking about illegal immigration?

Because the thread got slightly derailed.

I think there’s is a BIG difference between bad wait-times for certain surgeries (Canadian healthcare issue) compared to getting suck in a financial hole that can potential derail peoples entire lives (US healthcare issue).

You did not address the main issue: Whats wrong with taking people with a abundance of wealth and giving it to those who struggle with basic humans needs (AKA transfer of wealth)?

I appreciate you responding in a civil manner.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I am damn tired of Obamacare. Now it's time for the correction. :)

OKAY, now I get it! The government exists only to please me and to do what I want! I’m enlightened!

I shall now go and demand the government stops taxing me and provides me with a unlimited supply of donuts and pink feathers. Will keep you guys updated on progress.

*Was going to put something about how people getting government support usually get off it eventually, but ont have time to find any sources. if someone else could find some good statistics on healthcare/ social services in the US, please post them :D.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I am damn tired of Obamacare. Now it's time for the correction. :)

Originally posted by jhco50:

Well, I don’t know how the healthcare in your country is, but what we are putting up with is just a transfer of wealth. Obamacare has devastated our medical community. It cannot be compared to real health care as it really doesn’t offer everyone health care. They are even planning on dictating what plan you must buy.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/28/gallup-peak-number-of-americans-delaying-medical-care-over-costs/

Whats wrong with it being “just a transfer of wealth”? In canada, the rich:

A) Accept that using the Canadian education system, roads, emergency services, infrastructure, subsidies, ect, comes with a indirect cost to pay via taxes.

OR

B) Deny that the Canadian government has helped them in any way in amassing their wealth, and avoid paying said taxes (AKA tax fraud).

In canada, group B is almost universally shunned as unethical and arrogant/lazy/cheap. In america, your “group B” is socially acceptable. This combined with your overly convoluted political system, results in (the US) still having debates about the ethics of taxes/ social services that most developed countries have finished decades ago. Thus, your (the US) government is advancing at a snails pace compared with almost all other developed countries*.

Obamacare is as weird as it is because its was gutted due to political pressure, and the largely irrational cultural fear of government in the US. That being said, I think (AKA guessing) obamacare still provides an affordable “default” for low income americans that were otherwise stuck with super shitty insurance or no insurance at all.

*map of countries with universal healthcare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_coverage_by_country#mediaviewer/File:Universal_health_care.svg

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I am damn tired of Obamacare. Now it's time for the correction. :)

Saying something disgusts you or calling all “liberals” stupid* do not formulate a valid counterargument.

“Hey, that’s communist/socialist/capitalist” is not a valid argument.

If you want to speak for “the American people”, feel free to do so. If you want anyone to take you seriously, go find some statistics to back yourself up.

The constant references to a potential revolution are weird and irrational.

Why are people talking about illegal immigration? If you want to start talking about immigration, you need to tie it to healthcare. Oh, and how about NOT organizing a militia to kick all the immigrants. NOTHING could POSSIBLY go wrong.

As a Canadian, this is all insane for me. We pay taxes. Everyone gets free healthcare, and peace of mind in knowing we won’t get screwed by insurance. I don’t get why the US population is so hostile to that idea.

*In canada, even our conservatives are more progressive then your “liberals”.