If we're not going to be a force for good in the world, it’s time for us to close down our foreign military bases & operations & spend some time & money rebuilding this country, gutted by Reaganomics
re: Mosaddeq and the Shah: I just noticed some hypocrisy: Storming an embassy and taking Americans hostage = BAD, but storming your own capital, and trying to take Americans hostages (and kill them) = GOOD? yeah, right....
Isn't there a fundamental difference between socialism and a strong social safety net? Socialism involves government ownership of capital, not just creating a shared safety net, similar to commercial insurance, but paid for out of taxes. There is a big difference to me.
First of all, Anthony has gone down the rabbit hole, but I really appreciate this article. One of the few conservatives I'm able to speak to today is my wonderful son, who has very good social values but fell in with a 'bad bunch' of Austrian School economists in college. As bad bunches go, could have been a lot worse. Anyway, he now calls himself an Anarcho-Capitalist, who thinks pure capitalism, without cronyism and unfair advantage by big corporations, can solve most of our social ills. I doubt it. But at least we have a shared view of the problems we face, and one of the very progressive things he embraces is non-intervention in foreign affairs. So no big military. Or much of a standing one at all, also open borders, because our national security problems would largely be solved by not messing with our neighbors. Those are actually very progressive ideas, and I generally agree with them, in principle.
If we were just arguing about how far to take government regulation, which he sees as causing most of our economic problems, and in all fairness the Reagan Revulsion did accomplish that, what a different political situation we'd have. Doesn't mean we don't now need sensible regulation to level the playing field, and steer the economy green, but we'd disagree on that, no doubt. He thinks the problem is government, I think the problem is unfettered capitalism. We can actually talk about it though, because I know he isn't a racist or a xenophobe. I'd like for him to see that book on socialism improving the lives of women though. Thanks for this article. It's a good historical summary of the mess we've made of the world.
re: Mosaddeq and the Shah: I just noticed some hypocrisy: Storming an embassy and taking Americans hostage = BAD, but storming your own capital, and trying to take Americans hostages (and kill them) = GOOD? yeah, right....
Of major countries the USA is ranked low for quality of infrastructure. Our Roads a a mess. Airports are old. Harbors cannot keep up with the imports. Republicans talk about infrastructure but do nothing about it. Infrastructure costs money. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264753/ranking-of-countries-according-to-the-general-quality-of-infrastructure/
https://www.google.com/search?q=us+infrastructure+rating+compared+to+other+countries&sxsrf=ALeKk01nhhAStDcgGtAnRxQQf6xgkL0mEA%3A1626896072177&source=hp&ei=yHb4YJ6JB5Sd-gTuzpCwAw&iflsig=AINFCbYAAAAAYPiE2Djx9Uzp6qpDZYanIRPb6uCGD0sr&oq=usa+infrastructure+rating&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYATIECAAQCjIECAAQCjoECCMQJzoFCAAQkQI6CAgAELEDEIMBOgsILhCxAxDHARCjAjoICC4QsQMQgwE6BQgAELEDOgIIADoOCC4QxwEQrwEQkQIQkwI6BwgAELEDEAo6CggAELEDEIMBEAo6DQguELEDEMcBEKMCEAo6CAgAEBYQChAeOgYIABAWEB5QjQ9Y1F1ghnJoAHAAeAKAAbQMiAHrMZIBETguNS4wLjEuMS4yLjEuMS4xmAEAoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpeg&sclient=gws-wiz
Isn't there a fundamental difference between socialism and a strong social safety net? Socialism involves government ownership of capital, not just creating a shared safety net, similar to commercial insurance, but paid for out of taxes. There is a big difference to me.
First of all, Anthony has gone down the rabbit hole, but I really appreciate this article. One of the few conservatives I'm able to speak to today is my wonderful son, who has very good social values but fell in with a 'bad bunch' of Austrian School economists in college. As bad bunches go, could have been a lot worse. Anyway, he now calls himself an Anarcho-Capitalist, who thinks pure capitalism, without cronyism and unfair advantage by big corporations, can solve most of our social ills. I doubt it. But at least we have a shared view of the problems we face, and one of the very progressive things he embraces is non-intervention in foreign affairs. So no big military. Or much of a standing one at all, also open borders, because our national security problems would largely be solved by not messing with our neighbors. Those are actually very progressive ideas, and I generally agree with them, in principle.
If we were just arguing about how far to take government regulation, which he sees as causing most of our economic problems, and in all fairness the Reagan Revulsion did accomplish that, what a different political situation we'd have. Doesn't mean we don't now need sensible regulation to level the playing field, and steer the economy green, but we'd disagree on that, no doubt. He thinks the problem is government, I think the problem is unfettered capitalism. We can actually talk about it though, because I know he isn't a racist or a xenophobe. I'd like for him to see that book on socialism improving the lives of women though. Thanks for this article. It's a good historical summary of the mess we've made of the world.
Vaccine Caused Clotting - Study Finds The Mechanism
C it Before it is closed down off internet
The black out on ivermectin is definitely deafening covid could have been cured a year ago
Now we all have to wait for fouchie s a patented version of ivermectin to come out
In ur dreams
There is no conclusive evidence that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine contains graphene oxide 500 dollars says they did