"If the NRA had its way, machine guns, grenade launchers, and light artillery would be legal." - Red55 you made that up can you find proof that the NRA wants to legalize public ownership of light artillery?
you are always going to have your extremists though. Hell there is a politician in Alaska that wants to make pre marital sex a crime. there is another in Georgia that wants to make miscarriages a felony. Now do I think all Republicans are wack jobs that think like that, yes... I mean no... here is something I got a chuckle out of. Sarah Palin yesterday....... well I will let you watch the video... Sarah Palin Wants To Know Whether We're In A 'Squirmish' In Libya
Transparency? I think that's being a bit idealistic. Companies have a right to charge whatever prices they choose for the products they offer. If it's too expensive, take your business elsewhere. Speaking for myself, I'd prefer that to waiting for voting time, and then assuming the people I elect will act in my interest. Maybe not on this board. An interesting bolded statement, given that you just cried foul that a company is allowed to set it's own prices. I don't think it's unreasonable to claim that leftist political orientations are more and more hostile to a free economy as they go further and further left. In the end, it's a question of which party is more lenient in allowing people to do with their money what they wish. And in my experience, leftists very often object that people are buying what they want, rather than what they ought to want.
Nope. But that was not the topic at hand. You changed the questions to get answers more to your liking. i would not have objected to that phraseology. I objected to R's. And that's the end of that. I'm obligated to respond to my statements, but not to "vague examples". Well, you keep challenging me on responses I make to R. Again, you've taken up his banner, that's all.
Compared to insurance companies, its not idealistic at all. Governments are subject to freedom of information requests. Companies are not. Impossible when they collude, and they do. But the object was not to companies setting their own prices, it was companies deciding who they will drop or not insure versus the government. Companies don't have to give a reason, government agencies do and without being influenced by their own profits. Not anywhere. There are no doubt some anti-capitalist kooks out there but the Democratic party does not and never has been against free enterprise or capitalism. Find us an instance if you can. Incorrect. I stated that government regulators are more transparent than insurance company regulators and have no profit motive to bias them. It's only a claim unless you can offer some examples. That's not what defines free enterprise or capitalism. :huh:
So you're saying had I used Democrats/Republicans the first time, you would have agreed? Then my point is just as valid. If you can admit that, I can admit I should have used the proper terms when describing the two sides of the argument. That's pretty chicken chit, but ok. Let's see... Here's my statement about your thoughts on the NRA: "... they're a bunch of gun-crazed loonies that want everyone and their mother to own a grenade launcher." Here's your actual thoughts on the NRA: "If the NRA had its way, machine guns, grenade launchers, and light artillery would be legal." Anyone else on this forum think the statement I quoted from Red was vague? Call me crazy if you want, but to me, those two statements are pretty closely related and equally insane... Which was pretty much my point. Go ahead and use my paraphrasing to take away from the ridiculousness of your statement. My point was made, I don't expect you to run with it. Besides, I know you're Red; You've never ever paraphrased any quote from any poster. Ever. You're the meanest, rootin-tootin-est, left-leaner this side of Pecos. :thumb: (I didn't deem you liberal, or Democrat.. happy?) Well, your silly posts sometimes just asked to be challenged. I obliged. All I did was provide examples of Democrats, who given the opportunity, would ban guns in a New York second. I never agreed with him on the fact that all Democrats want guns banned. It's funny that you're going to hold me to exact phrases only, then you go and tell me what my sentiment in posting was. That'll do, kettle.
I think given this administration, transparency is a pipe dream. Then you are making an argument not against insurance companies, but against free enterprise in general, for it is possible for any company to collude with competitors. Yet this only rarely happens. Why not? I'd say because collusion will a) piss off your customers, and then b) get your ass sued which means c) losing money in settlements and lost customers. And even failing this, if an effective monopoly occurs, to the extent that the company mistreats is customers is the extent to which they flirt with a viable competitor rising to cater to their disgruntled customers I didn't say that democrats were communists and socialists. I said that on the spectrum with free enterprise on the right side end and restricted enterprise on the left, democrats move further to the left. Left-wing political philosophy is generally more restrictive of economic freedom, and democrats tend to, you know, lean left. The only possible exceptions I can think to that rule are China and Vietnam. What motive do government regulators have to be transparent that insurance companies don't, if there is no risk of going out of business? You need examples that leftist governments tend to be more and more extremely anti-economic freedom as they head further and further left? Okay, uh...The soviet union perhaps? Extraordinary taxes in blue states? Free enterprise isn't defined by the freedom to engage in your own enterprises?
