Fidel Castro Applauds Obama for Healthcare Bill

[Casper]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Cuban-leader-applauds-US-apf-124808403.html?x=0&.v=1&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

No, this healthcare bill isn't communism.... LOL

For those who don't want to read, Fidel Castro applauds Obama and the democrats for passing this healthcare bill, but says communist Cuba did it decades ago. Hmmm.

[Disclaimer]

Man it would suck if someone did something I agreed with, or SAID I agreed with and they'd be associated with doing something I approve.

Total burn on your rep.

[Casper]

Man it would suck if someone did something I agreed with, or SAID I agreed with and they'd be associated with doing something I approve.

Total burn on your rep.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, commie.

[Disclaimer]

I bet you can suck your own dick

I liked that better - ya know, before the edit.

[Casper]

I liked that better - ya know, before the edit.

I posted it and then thought to myself, "well.... that's a little harsh. funny, but harsh".

[Likwid]

So does that mean Canada and Hawaii are communist countries/states?

[Disclaimer]

:lol:I posted it and then thought to myself, "well.... that's a little harsh. funny, but harsh".

To be honest, it is quite the sight when I do it. And that explains my swagger.

[Likwid]

Not sure.. how does Canadian/Samoan health care compare to the new US health care?

The new US health care is much weaker but still, drawing the conclusion that "government controlled" = communism is a big stretch to make...

well not now since Casper changed his post... but w/e

[timotheus]

i hate to split hairs but it is more socialism than communism. fidel knows a good socialist when he sees one.

[dmagicglock]

this is definitions from the dictionary on my MAC (so since apple is a liberal company we can assume these are liberal definitions lol)

This is a marxist def. of socialism:

• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

Here's their break down of communism:

political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. See also Marxism .

The most familiar form of communism is that established by the Bolsheviks after the Russian Revolution of 1917, and it has generally been understood in terms of the system practiced by the former USSR and its allies in eastern Europe, in China since 1949, and in some developing countries such as Cuba, Vietnam, and North Korea. Communism embraced a revolutionary ideology in which the state would wither away after the overthrow of the capitalist system. In practice, however, the state grew to control all aspects of communist society. Communism in eastern Europe collapsed in the late 1980s and early 1990s against a background of failure to meet people's economic expectations, a shift to more democracy in political life, and increasing nationalism such as that which led to the breakup of the USSR.

So we're not commies yet! we're just in a transitional state, and then when the country sees that these policies don't work for shit, we'll go back more towards a democracy.

[Disclaimer]

Or they could see they work well, and we're all doomed!

[dmagicglock]

Or they could see they work well, and we're all doomed!

give me on example of communism that has worked well?

North Korea is just living it up in isolation.

[Disclaimer]

I dunno... you said "these policies".

You drove to work on a road this morning didn't you? Communist.

There are certain things that are MUCH better state controlled than private. It's 'what exactly' and 'who' that we need to debate. All free-market and all-communism extremes would be bad. Everything tends to be bad if you do it to an excess. The only thing you really can't have TOO MUCH of, is knowledge.

[dmagicglock]

I dunno... you said "these policies". There are certain things that are MUCH better state controlled than private. It's 'what exactly' and 'who' that we need to debate. All free-market and all-communism extremes would be bad. Everything tends to be bad if you do it to excess.

You drove to work on a road this morning didn't you? Communist.

oh the road that the state or local municipality paid a private contractor to pave? that road yes...

[Disclaimer]

Still managed by the state. You don't go out to your mailbox and put a check in there every time the steamroller comes by for your portion in front of YOUR driveway do you?

[dmagicglock]

No it just comes out of my taxes every paycheck. Listen, I am not an anarchist, I realize that there has to be some govt for infrastructure and defense. But I don't need them to manage every aspect of my life for me. Some people might want that, I don't. Comparing the building of roads to the takeover of healthcare, and the failure of social security, medicaire, medicaid, amtrack, etc... is 2 completely different things. Btw... it was released today that social security will take in less this year than it pays out... this wasn't suppose to happen for another 4 years. Why didn't the government release this info before the healthcare vote? I even found the article on the huffington post for you so you'd find it credible

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henry-blodget/whoops-social-security-ju_b_512677.html

[Likwid]

fucking Justin's been reading/citing 4chan/digg again.

We take drugs the government have to say are safe, we drive cars the government defines are safe, we use the internet developed by the government (but really Al Gore), and our television is regulated by what the government thinks is appropriate....

Stop fucking complaining people, Obama didn't bring this on, it's been happening for decades.

[Disclaimer]

I realize that there has to be some govt for infrastructure and defense. But I don't need them to manage every aspect of my life for me. Some people might want that, I don't.

And that's why we have these discussions, to determine how many of these aspects are better off managed by the government and how many are better off managed by the private sector.

Comparing the building of roads to the takeover of healthcare, and the failure of social security, medicaire, medicaid, amtrack, etc... is 2 completely different things.

Well, when the gov't pays the medical bills for A LOT of people and it's becoming an increasing drain on the budget vs. the GDP - yea, it's going to get some attention. The gov't pays for this, and needs to be able to reign it in. I don't know why you think it's a takeover. If there's a runaway train and someone tries to get on it and hit the brakes, are they hijacking the train, or saving it from imminent doom? I guess it depends on your perspective.

Btw... it was released today that social security will take in less this year than it pays out... this wasn't suppose to happen for another 4 years. Why didn't the government release this info before the healthcare vote? I even found the article on the huffington post for you so you'd find it credible

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henry-blodget/whoops-social-security-ju_b_512677.html

I wasn't aware of that, but it doesn't shock me or change my feelings. Now or 4 years from now, everyones' been well aware of it being an issue.

[chevysoldier]

I'd just like to interject something... the government doesn't pay for anything. There is no such thing as "government money"... that is all.

I thought they were just printing more as they needed it? They could do that for the armored car incident?