[QUOTE="SoBaus"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] And that depends on what you base the ideology on. Again...the healthcare itself in the US is second to none. It's the payment of it that moves it down the list. The list would be vastly different if payment was not considered. If we were only looking at the medical treatment itself. So that doesn't prove anything. The private health care is better than government provided care. And I know since while I was in the army....I had government care.;)LJS9502_basic

No thats BS propoganda you are fed. Survival outcomes for diseases and treatment costs are all very math based, and they all beat us. It proves they live longer, and spend a whole lot less money to do so. These are facts, recorded statistics.

And dont pull the soldier card on me, because i have friends that are 10x the soldier you were... and they were liberals.

I get a little angry about the soldier thing, because i get pidgeon holed as a liberal... but ive buried my friends from the war. Touchy subject for me. And no offense, but you are living, i think my firend in the dirt gave a little more effort.

I guess the end result is we both have false impressions, but i still think my friends underground gave it their all, despite the medals.

[QUOTE="SoBaus"]

so what about insurance and banking industries, that are proven to operate with less overhead when controlled by the government? If it comes to making the coolest toaster, that the free market can manage, fine. If it comes to handing money from one person to another... the government does it better with far less overhead, and thats a fact. Not only proven in our government but proven in multiple other governments.

Why should i pay a 30% overhead on my insurance to placate your baseless free market ideals? its my money, and you are stealing my money by making me buy insurance on the free market.

airshocker

Answer my response directed to you, first. Then I shall answer you.

sorry, which one?

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]So you believe that everything that the government does the free market can do better, but that we should still have a government? Why should we have a government if everything it does is s*** compared to the free market? For the lulz?airshocker

With the caveat: In the economy. Some things aren't related to the economy, as I already listed.

so what about insurance and banking industries, that are proven to operate with less overhead when controlled by the government? If it comes to making the coolest toaster, that the free market can manage, fine. If it comes to handing money from one person to another... the government does it better with far less overhead, and thats a fact. Not only proven in our government but proven in multiple other governments.

Why should i pay a 30% overhead on my insurance to placate your baseless free market ideals? its my money, and you are stealing my money by making me buy insurance on the free market.

why are free market advocates allowed to steal my money because they wanna strong arm the legal system?

[QUOTE="SoBaus"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

As this has been explained in countless threads, countless times, the more free the market is, the better it is. There are only certain circumstances where the government needs to get involved, and those are well-documented and most conservatives don't really have a problem with it.

You seem to think the government isn't capable of over-stepping it's authority, which is completely false.

Mafiree

prove it. prove that the more free a market is, the better it performs... prove it.

But seriously dont waste your time, because you cant. ITs all based on blind faith (back to the original point,, hell yea)

prisons is your example? really?

We have the highest imprisonment rate of any country, we also have judges that have admitted to being bought off by the private prison companies in order to convict children wrongfully, in order to help populate private prisons in order to increase their profits.

So a for profit system that pays judges, to wrongfully convict children and send them to prison.... is a free market ideal to you?

I think you made my point for me.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

Because of what you said:

airshocker

That doesn't make what I said completely false. It's naive to think the government doesn't have it's uses. But it certainly isn't the solution for everything.

who says that?

its also naive to see a dozen other countries beating us in healthcare outcomes and costs, but to pretend we have a better system. There are a dozen different systems out there and all of them out perform us.

But yet we cant improve our system because its socialism if we do.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]This is usually where conservatives hit a wall. There's no way a free market like they envision it will ever work fine.airshocker

As this has been explained in countless threads, countless times, the more free the market is, the better it is. There are only certain circumstances where the government needs to get involved, and those are well-documented and most conservatives don't really have a problem with it.

You seem to think the government isn't capable of over-stepping it's authority, which is completely false.

prove it. prove that the more free a market is, the better it performs... prove it.

But seriously dont waste your time, because you cant. ITs all based on blind faith (back to the original point,, hell yea)

[QUOTE="SoBaus"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Again with the ad hominem attacks. I went to a university that was accredited in business. What you are posting in this thread is contrary to the business discipline. Yes...new companies will not generally be profitable for a bit. Then they either become profitable....or they no longer exist. Period. The tax code gives companies a few years to run at a loss. After that they can no longer continue to claim a loss as the government now considers them to be a hobby....not a business. So that safety umbrella is removed.LJS9502_basic

I graduated from UCONN business school, which i believe is like top 10 or 20 in the country. You sound like an accounting major and not a business major.

The value of a company is beyond profits. And companies like google subsist on their reputation as during the search engine wars, they had the worst positioning and they couldnt even sell themselves. Google exists based on customer feedback and loyalty alone.

Thinking everything has to be profitable is the same reason republicans cant understand the value of infrastructure. For instance, do you own a home? are you making profit off that home? based on your very simplistic logic, clearly you shouldnt own that home then.

I dont know what "not that much" constitutes. And plenty of companies have been valuated at billions despite never turning a profit. Profit is onlly a small segment of a business valuation.

But since you understand the home owner idea i guess you understand the difference between good and bad debt.... which also applies to the economy.

[QUOTE="SoBaus"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I dont think you get economic theory.

sonicare

explain this one to me.

the principlce of it all is, ill throw out my 401k, my health insurance, my social security, my car insurance, basically every right i have... because we no longer need them, because the free market is gonna handle all that stuff.

Thats economic theory right? throwing caution into the wind because the invisible hand of the market will somehow take care of all of us? thats called blind faith.

Whenever ive been graded, ive always been good at economic theory.

entitlements are basically a way of saying we take care of our elderly (works for my grandma and works for me). Which seems like a basic concept for any civilized society.

the only alternative being letting them die on the street.