Switzerland is Socialist. Socialism is Democratic Capitalism evolved. Communism, or marxist leninism, is a totally different concept. That was a concept created to try and bring Socialism about faster, which is ironic and hypocrytical to say the least of the matter. Its kinda like the Catholic Church using teachings of Jesus to justify the Crusades. My view of America? Who ever said anything about America? I said Capitalism, I never even mentioned a country in specific...at the most, I mentioned the right in America, or the Republican party, but really, you'd have to be an idiot to think the Republican party is efficient at anything. They don't stop abortion, they don't stop gay people from having sex, only the super rich get any good tax cuts, domestic programs are ignored (no child left behind is the stupidest concept I've ever heard of, as is the plan to privatize social security) and at the end of the day, we have a war that should have been over and done with two years ago, and the largest budget deficit in history. There are tons of things I don't agree with as far as the Democrats are concerned as well, just saying...its a joke...and if you can't see that...you probably believe Noah's ark happened as well. lol.

And we still need 160,000 troops and a budget deficit of half a trillion dollars a year when the population outnumbers the minority 3 to 1. I never heard Bush say that the point of the war was to get rid of Sadaam in and of itself...that came after no WMDs were discovered. The CIA already has shown itself capable of installing a Revolution without even sending in troops to the area...look at how Saddam got in place.

Sorry, I really don't know how to respond to your post. I suppose that's because it doesn't appear to be in response to anything I said. Are you arguing with the voices in your head? I'll try and simplify...

Me: Equality of opportunity, good. Equality of outcomes, bad.

You: Elementary school children dodge bullets. Bullets hurt. People without health insurance are left to die. Public transportation, bad. Drug programs, bad. Eat beans or go to prison. Prison population, big. Canadian healthcare, good. Jobs disappearing.

Do you even understand your point?

The facts remain:
Fact: Education is no guarantee of success. Lack of education is no guarantee of failure.
Fact: Anyone who wants a quality education in the U.S. can get one.
Nothing you have said in anyway refutes my point.

No argument here. That's because the government is involved in it.

Inaccurate. Edison lacked formal education. In fact, he did not even have access to one of "the worst school systems in the industrialized world."
http://www.thomasedison.com/biog.htm1

The voices in your head are back I see.

Me: Thomas Edison said, "Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration." He didn't even mention education.

You: Ben Franklin loved libraries! He hated war! Highway bills, good! War in Iraq, bad! Deficit, bad! Capitalism, bad - Socilaism, good!

Seriously, is this the best you can do?

Really? Show me the quote where I say this. Because I thought I said...
Silly me.

Glad you asked. You're getting quite the history lesson...
You would appear to need lessons in Economics as well as History. The Federal Reserve does not print money. It controls interest rates. Please read the links I listed in my earlier post.

This is a problem with Capitalism? Are you serious? Can you list an example of a Capitalist advocating the devaluation of currency by printing more money? Most hard-core Capitalists want to go back to the gold standard and base credit only on tangible assets. For them everything is about fiscal responsibility.

Overall, you appear to be basing your opinions on untruths and inaccuracies. You need to check your premises.

Sad, don't you think it's the least bit naive to assume that the world can indefinitely support an ever-growing population that consumes more resources on a yearly basis? And unless you can point to something more tangible than "oh, we'll develop something to replace oil," I don't think it's wise to dismiss that problem. Everyone just puts blind faith into some abstract magic bullet without actually defining what it is...and how it'll work.

__________________
Proudly a "South Park Republican"

I think it is naive to believe that we are anywhere near the saturation point. A million years isnt indefinite for example, but it's a very long time. The sky isnt falling.

Alternatives already exist. You dont believe the technology that exploits alternative energy sources will mature? It may be 10 years or 50 or 100, but it will happen.

Everyone that has been predicting the world's end so far has been wrong.

Like I said, throwing money at it worked. Your statement was incorrect. Deep pockets made a difference.

The main reason it costs us so much (in terms of money and troops) is because we are the good guys, so we pull our punches. Carpet bombing the entire nation into powder would have costs us a fraction of what we paid, and would have cost us almost no lives.

Move to Cuba, or North Korea. They will accept you with open arms... but you might want to bring some food with you, I hear they don't feed you so well.

Is this post even directed at anyone? I assume it is me since I am pretty well up against every single poster on this site for a reason I really am not sure of...maybe because I'm not some sheep that throws out the baby with the bathwater...uh...but I'm not even close to Communism. I'm a moderate if anything...maybe slightly left since I don't believe in the need for the great majority of the military, and because I do believe in the right of free, useful, Harvard quality education for anyone that wishes for it, which is more then possible in the information age we live in--the last part isn't even a matter of money, it is simply a matter of organization to help it to be easier for Edison's and such that are self motivated but must reinvent the wheel a hundred different ways before they come out with their groundbreaking theories...society is evolving very fast today...but we could be moving forward, much, much faster.

Free knowledge and quality education will probably happen within the next 20 years anyhow with the Internet the way it is today, but it should already be this way...there should already be a national site where people can go on and learn Calculus for free, take a test, and make it good for any college or institution, instead of having to shell out 300 bucks at the local community college and not be able to take a test even if you know the knowledge. That's just the tip of the iceberg, but really, the army can train people to be a nurse in a mere six months, and you are paid in the process. If you go through modern day education, you pay thousands, learn a bunch of bs you don't need, go along with mediocrity, and go with the bureacracy. Soviet Union was dirt poor, but at the same time, their education was always ahead of the United States--that's one thing you have to give them credit for. If it weren't for Sputnik, our science might still be as backwards as it was 50 years ago.

It will happen soon enough anyhow, and if you are really motivated enough, you can learn much more then you could ever before, but even so, average education in the U.S. is well behind Europe and Japan. A lot of these backcountry folk have stickers on their science textbooks that says "evolution is a theory, not a fact." Those same states are often those that vote for the right...I think I see a pattern here....

IF you still need 160,000 troops in the area, your job is not yet over. The President can claim an end to "combat operations," whatever the hell that is supposed to mean, as the real war had barely even bgun at the time (urban warfare and immense guerilla bombing, but then again...we got Saddam. Getting Saddam is barely above killing off a head of the hydra. Right now, the army just fell short 2,600 according to their recruiting targets. The National Gaurd fell short for the first time in ten years. In the meantime, suicide bombing is still at the same rate it was, and US troops are being worn down slowly but surely, as they will have to come home soon. The National Gaurd is coming out soon, and the army will be stuck in about the same position as they were coming in. Sure, some insurgents have been knowcked out, but Iraq will not even begin to be safe until US troops are out, which will not happen as there is simply that much violence in the region. We basically walked into a hornet's nest to do what? Spend over 1 trillion dollars SO FAR---PLUS interest in debt to save 20 million people from a watered down dictatorship? What would carpet bombing have done to the area? Already, 20,000 Iraqis are dead THAT ARE KNOWN, and you could bet that that number would be far higher from carpet bombing, and that the US would have been even in worse shape as even the Shiites would hate our guts. How could there be a Democracy installed from carpet bombing? I
When I see US troops home and the budget balanced, I will finally say there has been success, and even then, I will still say that it was the most costlly wasteful and counter productive forms of "success" in American history. I don't even need to say that it was all a ploy to give friends money in government, and that the result was worth the corruption. If there were no corruption, and a completly good will in those of government, it is still beyond madness.

As someone else pointed out, education is not the end all to ending poverty and oppression. Abraham Lincoln was perhaps our best and most articulate leader and he never attended a single day of school in his life. If anything, the self made man is often a better citizen than the product of an inefficient welfare state.

It is naive, I agree to simply assume in a magic bullet, and I do not wish to start an arguement with you as you are looking at technology as it is today, but when you see where science is at today, and at how fast computers are today, you also realize that much of our energy is wasted and could be conserved if we were forced to be. Incandescent lightbulbs aren't even scratiching the very, very tip of the iceberg, and drip line irrigation and newly designed toilets and power systems will decrease consumption dramatically. Population size in India and China is due to the transition phase to Capitalism...once a population hits advanced Capitalism, or the lower forms of what a philosopher of the 1800s might think ideal "socialism" to be, you find that birth rate drops to around 1.8 per person (developing countries its like 4), and that population actually shrinks and becomes more efficient while becoming more productive at the same time, which creates a sort of exponential growth. I mean, oil isn't even an issue..it is an issue from choices that are lax as people are undisciplined. Markets force people to be efficient and disciplined...it just pisses off the disiplined people when they crash from all the idiots who believe they are safe driving around SUVs that get 12 mpg, never stopping to think that they lose over 1,000 dollars a year, which could have gone to pay off their outstanding house payment--in other words, they might as well be paying everything on credit.

"It is better to go to miss dinner and go to bed hungry then to be in debt."

--Benjamin Franklin.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AD0894DD404482

This article is about people who hacked the Prius and found out a way to get 140mpg off watered down tech by plugging it into a wall overnight and using the electrical grid instead of oil. We aren't going to run out of nuclear power anytime soon...zero emisions, and very cheap to produce. Nuclear power isn't even advanced either...power systems will be a lot cheaper in 20 years...at the very least though, the resources are there, and if push comes to shove, people will find a way.

Toyota has some tech that can get that mileage without plugging it into a wall.
The Prius is just a little warm up before they kill GM and Ford like they did back in the 80s when gas went up the first time, heh heh...except this time, they will feel it worse, as these idiots didn't invest correctly. Toyota has a car that can get 130mpg off diesal fuel and burn cleanly. It was a concept like three years ago, and they can make it cheap...I don't have time to get into that though, said it before on another post...but there you have it...