But hey, fuck us all. Let's have anarchy and everyone fend for themselves. I
a friend of mine goes bankrupt because they got cancer, well, fuck 'em.

While not true always, a lot of people go bankrupt when something really
bad happens because they never learned how to save money. IMHO, I am not
their parents and don't work for the education system so when THAT happens
it is really not my problem. Nor should it be the government's
responsibility to bail them out.

And then, this also:

The rest of world, nope.

That is actually false. In some places you don't go bankrupt because you
won't get the treatment in the first place, so you DIE instead. That is
the trade off. We can get treatment, we can sue if we don't like the treatment, but we could go bankrupt. I like my changes in a system like
that better than in one where I might get treatment but might also die
because I cannot.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Hired goons????" - Homer

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 2021-01-24 11:43 p.m., MRO wrote:

i dont think canada is that welcoming but i think we should put that caravan on a boat to canada with some film crews to ease it along :D

I agree, contrary to what people thing, not just anybody can get in. For
a skilled worked which it can make it easier we are taking of a multi
years process not unlike us immigration. We do deport and have detention center etc.

We have health care, disability pensions etc. but we also have to make
sure it's sustainable with tax money from a working population.

People think it's socialism here. Nah. People work, pay taxes. We
probably pay more tax, but we get more benefit when old, disabled or
sick. Nothing is free, someone pay for it. We are as pissed at people
abusing the system as much as you are in the U.S. about people abusing
the system in your country.

We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency in order to make the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.

And finally for most, are your ready to plea allegiance to a queen ?

But above all for a case of a caravan from Mexico wanted to cross the
united state to come to Canada, well you have this :

Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement

"Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, persons seeking
refugee protection must make a claim in the first country they arrive in (United States or Canada)"

They could say they want to come to Canada and disappear along the way
in nature. Government of any countries are not crazy about illegal immigration.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: move to Canada they say
By: Ennev to MRO on Mon Jan 25 2021 09:58 am

i dont think canada is that welcoming but i think we should put that
caravan on a boat to canada with some film crews to ease it along :D

I agree, contrary to what people thing, not just anybody can get in. For a skilled worked which it can make it easier we are taking of a multi years process not unlike us immigration. We do deport and have detention center etc.

I don't doubt Canada has a process to get in, but my impression has been Canada might be easier to get into than the US. I've talked to people online from other countries who have visited or moved to Canada but haven't visited the US (that I know of). I suppose for some, they just wanted to be in Canada. I've also known some people from Brazil who have had a hard time getting into the US, but one who was able to visit Canada.

Nightfox

On 2021-01-25 11:15 a.m., Nightfox wrote:

En> I agree, contrary to what people thing, not just anybody can get in. For
En> a skilled worked which it can make it easier we are taking of a multi
En> years process not unlike us immigration. We do deport and have detention
En> center etc.

It might be easier to get into Canada, but it's not automatic. Usually
if you can prove that you have a job contract with a Canadian employer
and no criminal past it's doable (but your stay can be locked to the
job, lose the job and you might have to leave). For immigration in
general it work on a point system, so you get point on mastery of the language, education, etc. There is a fixed numbers of immigrant every
year and your score will help to get picked. They is also factors like reassembling families and humanitarian reason. Just one can't just
assume you can permanent residency just like that :-D

What I hate is that in some countries there is phony agency that tell
people that for a price they can get easier residency, but it's a scam.
People get defrauded then blame Canada.

Visitor? they are welcome. But for example a Brazilian visitor would
need to obtain a visa first. But an American would not.

Naturally a visitor would not be allowed to work nor would receive free
health care etc.

What change in the last decade I think is that now people immigrate to
Canada to live in Canada. In the past we where more a "gateway" to the
U.S. I had a lot of former co-workers that came to Canada so it would be easier to find then a job in the U.S. This seem to be less of a case.
Here in Montreal we get a lot of French, because it's naturally easier
to find work in french, they love the opportunity to live in a less
regulated society (compared to France) where moving up the ladder is
less hard or to start business. But the rest is also true in the rest of Canada if you master English.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Ennev to Nightfox on Mon Jan 25 2021 01:40 pm

It might be easier to get into Canada, but it's not automatic. Usually
if you can prove that you have a job contract with a Canadian employer and no criminal past it's doable (but your stay can be locked to the
job, lose the job and you might have to leave). For immigration in general it work on a point system, so you get point on mastery of the language, education, etc. There is a fixed numbers of immigrant every year and your score will help to get picked. They is also factors like reassembling families and humanitarian reason. Just one can't just
assume you can permanent residency just like that :-D

Does mastery of the language include learning French? Or would it be enough to just have mastery of English? (or just French for that matter?)

Does marriage to a Canadian citizen help with getting residency/citizenship in Canada?

What I hate is that in some countries there is phony agency that tell people that for a price they can get easier residency, but it's a scam. People get defrauded then blame Canada.

It's frustrating that people try to defraud people that way.

Naturally a visitor would not be allowed to work nor would receive free health care etc.

If a visitor is in Canada and has to go to a hospital for some reason, I'd assume they'd be billed for their hospital stay?

What change in the last decade I think is that now people immigrate to Canada to live in Canada. In the past we where more a "gateway" to the U.S. I had a lot of former co-workers that came to Canada so it would be

It seems to me Canada would be a decent place to live.
One time when I was looking for work, I considered looking outside my state and even in Canada, because why not? I was looking into it and found that if I decided I'd want dual citizenship with Canada and the US, one consequence is I'd have to pay taxes to both the US and Canada, even if I was living in Canada (at least, that was my understanding).

Nightfox

On 2021-01-25 4:39 p.m., Nightfox wrote:

Does mastery of the language include learning French? Or would it be enough to just have mastery of English? (or just French for that matter?)

Quebec (the official french province, but millions of french live in the
rest of Canada) did gain the right to use french as a criteria for
people immigrating in that province. You could even not be able to speak English and be welcomed anyway. If you intend to only live only in
Quebec English in your daily life is not necessary. Federal law and law
in that province are published in both official language and service
also have to be given in both.

Does marriage to a Canadian citizen help with getting residency/citizenship in Canada?

Not automatic, the Canadian spouse would have to fill a spousal
sponsorship application. This can get tricky.

It's frustrating that people try to defraud people that way.

I'm sure the same happen for would be U.S. immigrant, it's sad.

If a visitor is in Canada and has to go to a hospital for some reason, I'd assume they'd be billed for their hospital stay?

Yes, they would be charged, so it wise to get some travel insurance
before visiting. Interesting fact, since each province and territory
manage health care, it's also tricky for let's say, someone in Ontario
to have care in Alberta, it's doable but then one province health care
charge the other one, lot of paper work.

It seems to me Canada would be a decent place to live.
One time when I was looking for work, I considered looking outside my state and even in Canada, because why not? I was looking into it and found that if I decided I'd want dual citizenship with Canada and the US, one consequence is I'd have to pay taxes to both the US and Canada, even if I was living in Canada (at least, that was my understanding).

Yeah, I've been around, have family living in the states. I'm happy in
Canada, don't get me wrong I think US is fine, it's a great country, but
i don't feel I'm missing opportunities and freedom here.

For tax, at least at the Canadian end, if you life outside the country
and don't have "Canadian income" (let's say you own a building in canada
and you have tenant paying rent, that is a Canadian income) you don't
have to pay taxes.

I'm not sure but I do think US citizen do have to pay federal taxes even
when living abroad. I remember hearing people giving away theirs
American citizenship for that reason when they don't intend to come back.

Dual citizenship is possible in Canada, except for some key roles.
Sometime it depend of the political situation between the counties. A
new Canadian does play allegiance to the queen at a ceremony, in a
conflict one would have to choose or be deported. My brother in law had
to give away his Canadian citizenship (his wife and 2 kids too) when he
moved to the US, it was in the 90's now it's not a requirement, it
depend of the time and the job you'll be occupying.

The Queen? does it mean a Canadian is British too? No, queen of Canada
and queen of England are to separate but concurrent title for her. All
the commonwealth country have law they negotiate together so that we
have all the same lay of succession, so that in a generation or 2 one
would end up with a different king or queen. The title is more of a
figure head, like the president of some country where all the power is delegated to the elected parliament.

For the Canadian pension plan? how come that permanent resident can get
it? Can a Canadian get it if he lived all his life abroad? You have to
life at least 10 years in Canada (with a recognized status) to be eligible.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

"Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, persons seeking
refugee protection must make a claim in the first country they arrive in (United States or Canada)"

Considering that any of the persons in question have to cross the US to get
to Canada first, it sounds like Canada cooked up an idea and got some
dummies here to agree with it. :)

Yet, when the US wants Mexico or other Central American countries to do the same for us (make them claim it in the first country they get to), our administration gets called names.


* SLMR 2.1a * Arnold Layne, don't do it again!

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Ennev wrote to MRO <=-

We have health care, disability pensions etc. but we also have to make sure it's sustainable with tax money from a working population.

Similar to the Scandanavian "socialism" that Bernie keeps touting.
They are very capitalist in wealth creation, but socialist in wealth distribution. So **everyone** pays in to the system (even the poor)
to get the "free" health care, etc. That't the part the Bernie people
keep neglecting to say: 50% tax on everyone.

We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency in order to make
the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.

You are extremely naive here. You got the private insurance company right
but your way off the mark with the government program.

The CEO of a company will get fired if he doesn't make happy customers
and shareholders. But nothing will happen to the government officials who
kill customers and the "shareholders" have no say since they don't get to vote those people in or our of office.

Government programs are always horribly inefficient and loaded with graft. Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.


... Go ahead, correct my typos. I'll make more.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Nightfox wrote to Ennev <=-

Does mastery of the language include learning French? Or would it be enough to just have mastery of English? (or just French for that
matter?)

I think you just have to get into the habit of adding "eh?" to the end
of every sentance. 8)


... Invest in negotiable blondes...
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2021-01-26 1:55 p.m., Dumas Walker wrote:

Considering that any of the persons in question have to cross the US to get to Canada first, it sounds like Canada cooked up an idea and got some
dummies here to agree with it. :)

Yes, it was setup during Bush's years. At first it does look more
interesting to Canadian that the US. We made a good deal on that one :-D

But we do get boats with refugees in them. And a lot will fly to Canada
and destroy theirs passport during the flight and claim status when they
get to the customs.

Per capita Canada take more refugee than thus U.S. Our population is
only about 38 millions compared to the 332 millions across the borders.
There is so much people we can take.

Pierre Trudeau (father of the actual prime minister ) said in the 70's:

" Living next to you (usa) is in some ways like sleeping with an
elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, if I
can call it that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt. "

I think the deal was more to save on border control between Canada/US

The border Mexico/US : 1,954 mi
The border Canada/US : 5,525 mi

The border Canada/Us is mostly unguarded. At some crossing at night
there not even staff, there a terminal and form so you can "self
check-in". Some town are even sitting on the border. I think of that
library in Vermont/Quebec that is literally on the line, inside on the
floor there a line showing the demarcation. Since 9/11 it's more divided
now, but theses places used to function as one town back then.

I think the big problem in the US are people without status, they don't
show at the border and ask for a status, they just go in and try to live
there without status and create that shadow economy.

Here what we had lately was a phenomenon call "Birth Tourism". Women
traveling to Canada to give birth to babies who will automatically
become Canadian citizens. Most of the time the mothers will leave with
the baby without paying the bill. Then after many years will use the
baby status to facilitate them obtaining a status in Canada.

I don't know for the US, but here you are Canadian if you are born in
Canada. Canadian parents having a baby abroad have to go trough steps so
the kid can obtains citizenship, it's not automatic. Seen case where
parent forgot to complete the process and the grown up kid end up with a
lot of trouble.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-27 9:22 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

You are extremely naive here. You got the private insurance company right but your way off the mark with the government program.

The CEO of a company will get fired if he doesn't make happy customers
and shareholders. But nothing will happen to the government officials who kill customers and the "shareholders" have no say since they don't get to vote
those people in or our of office.

Government programs are always horribly inefficient and loaded with graft. Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.

Not everything is free, so I'll use that for an example.

Dental is not free for adult, just young kids. But trough work you can subscribe to a dental plan. So you end up with a coverage and don't have
to pay for what can be very expensive.

But oddly when it's time to make the bill, because most of the time it's
you the patient that pay and them claim the work insurance for a refund.

Well theses dentist before fixing a price will always ask :
"are you covered by an insurance?"

Because yes, if you are insured they'll charge more.

Also I think that there is collusion between companies. They won't try
to offer you more if the next guys doesn't. It's not like you as a
employee can pick, up to your boss.

We did are still do experiment here where for example building a new
hospital will be done with a Private/Public partnership. And the end the public always end to pay more to the private company than originally
planned.

I guess there is no perfect system.

I think there can be a lot of collusion and corruption.

In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)

And yet life expectancy is theses countries are fairly the same.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-27 9:31 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

I think you just have to get into the habit of adding "eh?" to the end
of every sentance. 8)

It's like saying that all American have a southern accent :-)

There is regions indeed that use "eh?" but I do here it more from people
from the maritime, but it's really in decline, younger people don't use
that, usually it's elders.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Dr. What wrote to Ennev <=-

@MSGID: <60118CF4.42546.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <600EDC80.11313.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>

Ennev wrote to MRO <=-

We have health care, disability pensions etc. but we also have to make sure it's sustainable with tax money from a working population.

Similar to the Scandanavian "socialism" that Bernie keeps touting.
They are very capitalist in wealth creation, but socialist in wealth distribution. So **everyone** pays in to the system (even the poor)
to get the "free" health care, etc. That't the part the Bernie people keep neglecting to say: 50% tax on everyone.

We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency in order to make
the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.

You are extremely naive here. You got the private insurance company
right but your way off the mark with the government program.

The CEO of a company will get fired if he doesn't make happy customers
and shareholders. But nothing will happen to the government officials
who kill customers and the "shareholders" have no say since they don't
get to vote those people in or our of office.

Government programs are always horribly inefficient and loaded with
graft. Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying
to reduce or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.

Scandinavia is as Capitalist as any other Capitalist country. Government spending isn't Socialism. Public ownership of the means of production is.

By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders, but those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those that own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Ennev to Dr. What on Wed Jan 27 2021 11:54 am

On 2021-01-27 9:31 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

I think you just have to get into the habit of adding "eh?" to the end
of every sentance. 8)

It's like saying that all American have a southern accent :-)

There is regions indeed that use "eh?" but I do here it more from people from the maritime, but it's really in decline, younger people don't use that, usually it's elders.
that, usually it's elders.

i like 'aboot'
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Ennev to Dr. What on Wed Jan 27 2021 11:50 am

But oddly when it's time to make the bill, because most of the time it's
you the patient that pay and them claim the work insurance for a refund.

Well theses dentist before fixing a price will always ask :
"are you covered by an insurance?"

Because yes, if you are insured they'll charge more.

Most Spanish insurances have a deal with a set of hospitals and doctors they want to work with.

The doctor or hospital has to attend the patient's case, and the patient is only expected to show proof they have a working
insurance plan (usually they just swipe the insurance card). The insurance company then pays the doctor or hospital an agreed
amount per case, or treatment technique, by the end of the month.

If you are not solving cases (people does not walk out of your clinic with your cases solved) or your stats are funky (you are
filling for more surgeries than the insurance thinks are justified) you get an audit.

The firm I work for got a practical monopoly in certain techniques because everybody else in the Autonomy failed their audits
:-) We donñ't get to change the prices because prices have been signed for a certain time span, messured in years. Also if we
got stupid, insurance companies would rather put the patient in a plane and ship him somewhere else.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: move to Canada they say
By: Ennev to MRO on Mon Jan 25 2021 09:58 am

We have health care because paying for it to an insurance company
instead of a universal program, what is the difference. A private
company will work to improve efficiency in order to maximize profit. A government program will want to maximize efficiency
order to make the voters happy and reduce taxes and getting re-elected.

Government programs exist to benefit the agents that design them.

Sometimes they benefit the agent that designed them and benefit the public at the same time. Sometimes it does not.

Lots of times you see infrastructure being built without being necessary at all, just because the agent commanding its
execution is getting a cut. Oftentimes, the cut is actually legal.

The agent in charge of a Government program does not need it to be good in order to generate votes. It needs it to look good.
Machiavello already knew that. This is why we have Socialist governments berating other parties' administrations for budget
cuts, while removing services from public healthcare themselves - they can make themselves appear to be more pro-public-welfare
than the competitors while saving money.

This is specially true when the Government itself owns radio and TV stations. If your infrastructure is failing, the only thing
you need to do is to have your radio and TV tell everybody how badly somebody else is doing and half the population won't know
our own programs are trash unless they need to use them themselves.

A lot of shady programs from the administration get a pass because people don't know they exist.

Last, but not least, if you launch a government program that puts a lot of employees into your payroll, you have just generated
a lot of hostages. Now, this people is going to be forced to vote FOR YOU, or risk the next administration kicking them into
unemployment. This means that if you create a government program that barely looks to be working (even if it is a waste of the
tax payer's money), you suddenly have A LOT of people who is going to vote for you, campaign for you, and I dare say take a
bullet for you, and it didn't cost you a dime because you built this political force with somebodyn else's money.

The administration is like a private corporation in which nobody gives a damn as long as they are making money, and you have no
option to opt out.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:

By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders, but
those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those that
own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.

Yes, governments should be seen like this.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

I don't know for the US, but here you are Canadian if you are born in
Canada. Canadian parents having a baby abroad have to go trough steps so
the kid can obtains citizenship, it's not automatic. Seen case where
parent forgot to complete the process and the grown up kid end up with a
lot of trouble.

We have/had the same thing in the USA. If your mother comes into the
country and then gives birth, you are a citizen. As you pointed out, some parents do that, then use the kid as an "anchor baby" to try to get
citizenship for themselves.

On the other hand, in most cases I think a child born abroad to US citizens
is considered a US citizen, although it may call into question their
"natural born citizen" status should they even want to run for office (not
sure about that).


* SLMR 2.1a * A momentary lapse of reason that binds a life to a life..

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.

They should consult with Greece to see what happens when a government tries
to ween the citizens off of the teet.


* SLMR 2.1a * Wind in my hair - shifting and drifting...

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)

Just for clarity, that means the government spends more per person? Interesting.


* SLMR 2.1a * I can't pretend a stranger is a long-awaited friend...

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to ENNEV on Thu Jan 28 2021 01:20 pm

We have/had the same thing in the USA. If your mother comes into the country and then gives birth, you are a citizen. As you pointed out, some parents do that, then use the kid as an "anchor baby" to try to get citizenship for themselves.

I think I heard they repealed that, at least for non-citizens giving birth in the US, since there were many people coming to the US to give birth so their child would have US citizenship. But maybe I'm wrong.

On the other hand, in most cases I think a child born abroad to US citizens is considered a US citizen, although it may call into question their "natural born citizen" status should they even want to run for office (not sure about that).

Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you have to actually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In some ways I'm not sure why that's a requirement - Someone could have been born abroad to US citizens and moved back to the US at an early age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they wanted to.

Nightfox

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Ennev to Dr. What on Wed Jan 27 2021 11:50 am

In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)

I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual citizens pay for their own healthcare, or does that also account for what the government pays in countries where healhcare is socialized?

Nightfox

On 2021-01-28 1:20 p.m., Dumas Walker wrote:

On the other hand, in most cases I think a child born abroad to US citizens is considered a US citizen, although it may call into question their
"natural born citizen" status should they even want to run for office (not sure about that).

Yeah, I remember hearing that Ted Cruz was born in Canada from a
American mother. Making his run for presidency being questioned.

Here it's different, there is no such requirement of being born in the country.

From memory even 2 of our head of state (being the governor general)
one was born in Haiti and the other in Hong Kong (before retro cession).

But you can't keep dual citizenship then.

But I get it you would want a president that is clear of allegiance to
another country.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-28 1:39 p.m., Dumas Walker wrote:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)

Just for clarity, that means the government spends more per person? Interesting.

Yes that's why it's puzzling that at that cost it's not universal for
it's citizen.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 28 Jan 2021, Nightfox said the following...

Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you have to actually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not sure why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizens and moved back to the US at an early age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they wanted to.

Back in the day, during the founding, they didn't want someone from an other country, who may still have loyalties to that country, now running the US.

Not sure if they'd follow it to the letter now.. Ted Cruz born in Canada, but a US citizen... John McCain born somewhere else, military base... he's a US citizen... I think Trump proved Obama wasn't a citizen and he became President.
There U go...

IB Joe
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of Joe's BBS
-=JoesBBS.com=-

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/01/16 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:2323 SSH:2222 HTTP:80

Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:

By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders,

bu

t

those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those

that

own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.

Yes, governments should be seen like this.

I don't think they should by seen like this, not at all. The relationship between the citizen and their government is not based on 'stakeholderism' but duty. There is a mutual duty.


We create insitutions to serve us. Shareholders don't create the company, or even if they did, it wouldn't be to serve them. Big difference there.

The government PURPOSE is to ensure that the civilisation, the nation that we build works effectively for our wellbeing and our sustained existance as a people. Our duty to the government is to protect our nation by ensuring that the government can do this effectively (and this in part involves policing the government).


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

On 2021-01-28 6:57 p.m., Nightfox wrote:

I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual citizens pay for their own healthcare, or does that also account for what the government pays in countries where healhcare is socialized?

After check it's classified in “Government/compulsory”

source : https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Ennev on Thu Jan 28 2021 09:19 pm

Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:

By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all shareholders,

bu

t

those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those

that

own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.

Yes, governments should be seen like this.

I don't think they should by seen like this, not at all. The relationship between the citizen and their government is not
based on 'stakeholderism' but duty. There is a mutual duty.

We create insitutions to serve us. Shareholders don't create the company, or even if they did, it wouldn't be to serve them
Big difference there.

The government PURPOSE is to ensure that the civilisation, the nation that we build works effectively for our wellbeing and
sustained existance as a people. Our duty to the government is to protect our nation by ensuring that the government can do
this effectively (and this in part involves policing the government).

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!

Thing is, people serves their own interests.

A public officer is "people" first and "public officer" second, or third, or forth....

There is a lot of people who seem to think that administration personal are magical light beings that are public officers
first and foremost. Fat chance. If you are a town hall secretary it serves your interests better that more secretaries are
hired, so you have to work less, than having a bumpy road you never use repaired.

An administrator that has enough power WILL try to work less and make more money out of his position even if it is at the
expense of the whole organization.

The second thing is, big corporations suffer pretty much this same problem. The main difference is that you can opt out of
being a customer of most corporations or at least reduce your relationship with them, so if they fail to keep their house tidy,
it is a bit less of a problem.

The government or the town hall can send the cops to shove a baton up your ass if you fail to purchase their services via
taxes. And if you complain that the mayor is using all the money to fund his own propaganda campaign instead of helping the
poor (for example) and therefore has no legit claim on your tax money, you'll get labeled a raving lunatic.

My point is that governments are supposed to be something mystical and magical, but are built by people, in order to pursue
that people's interests. If it didn't pursue their interests, they would not bother to build it. All this talk about a
government made by the whole population for the whole population is jjust propaganda spread so the population keeps sustaining
the lifestyle of the Administration's agents.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

On 2021-01-29 5:55 a.m., Arelor wrote:

An administrator that has enough power WILL try to work less and make more money out of his position even if it is at the
expense of the whole organization.

My point is that governments are supposed to be something mystical and magical, but are built by people, in order to pursue
that people's interests. If it didn't pursue their interests, they would not bother to build it. All this talk about a
government made by the whole population for the whole population is jjust propaganda spread so the population keeps sustaining
the lifestyle of the Administration's agents.

That's why I use greed against this. Rotating auditor being promised
nice bonuses when they identify irregularities. People will be people
indeed you can't expect then to turn "angels" when they are in a public position.

The bigger the machine gets the more chances of corruption at any levels.

I'm not trying to demonstrate which system is better than another.
Canadian healthcare for example is always a topic in our politics and is constantly being re-evaluated and adjusted.

Nothing is perfect and everything should be reassess and examined
continually, need changes and technologies etc.

Life expectancy in 2020 in Canada is estimated at 82. Yet the national
pension plan kick in when your 65. It was a system put in place when and
1965 when life expectancy was much lower. Is it still sustainable now ?

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: IB Joe to Nightfox on Thu Jan 28 2021 05:57 pm

Not sure if they'd follow it to the letter now.. Ted Cruz born in Canada, but a US citizen... John McCain born somewhere else, military base... he's a US citizen... I think Trump proved Obama wasn't a citizen and he became President. There U go...

Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.

Nightfox

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

I guess there is no perfect system.

I think there can be a lot of collusion and corruption.

That's what happens when the consumer isn't involved.

The doctors don't post prices for services. Money changes hands behind the scenes that we consumers don't see.

Unless we look hard at the bill... er... statement to see what the doctor charged the insurance company for (and if I'm not paying anything, why
look hard at the bill?) we won't see the charges for services not rendered.

No. There's no perfect system. But we can keep borrowing the successes
of others while dropping the failures and narrow in on something more
prefect than today.

But we know that socialized medicine isn't the answer. Well, I guess it
could be the answer if the question was "how do we siphon off money from
the health care market to line our own pockets?"


... But honey, I wouldn't be up so late on a faster machine!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-

Scandinavia is as Capitalist as any other Capitalist country.
Government spending isn't Socialism. Public ownership of the means of production is.

You need to get educated on "socialism" if you think it's only about public ownership.

By the way, the government is like a big company.

Then how do we fire the unelected, unappointed bureaucrats in our gov't
who set the rules?

We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.


... "640K ought to be enough for anybody." (Bill Gates, 1981)
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dumas Walker wrote to DR. WHAT <=-

Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are trying to reduce
or eliminate the government programs and convert them to private.

They should consult with Greece to see what happens when a government tries to ween the citizens off of the teet.

Oh, ya. They admit it's hard and it will take a LONG time.

Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security here in the U.S.
and replace it with private saving's plans.


... To test a man's character, give him power.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Nightfox wrote to Ennev <=-

In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend the most on healthcare per person are:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
Germany ($5,986)
Sweden ($5,447)
Austria ($5,395)
Denmark ($5,299)
Netherlands ($5,288)
Luxembourg ($5,070)
Australia ($5,005)

I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual citizens
pay for their own healthcare, or does that also account for what the government pays in countries where healhcare is socialized?

It looks like a forest level number.

Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of people


... Any given program, once running, is obsolete.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2021-01-29 8:52 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

Unless we look hard at the bill... er... statement to see what the doctor charged the insurance company for (and if I'm not paying anything, why
look hard at the bill?) we won't see the charges for services not rendered.

Actually there is a fix amount given to a doctor for a consultation.
Weirdly doctors are private employee and do have to bill the gov with
the healtcare care number of the patient a bit like if it was a credit
card. To having Doctors in my family I do know that they get audited
etc. Is there is still chance for fraud, yes, because some get caught
and lose theirs licenses, do they all get caught? probably not.

But we know that socialized medicine isn't the answer. Well, I guess it could be the answer if the question was "how do we siphon off money from
the health care market to line our own pockets?"

We prefer to call it here an "universal" program vs socialized, since
it's part of your taxes and everybody pays. It's reassuring that if you
lose a job you don't lose coverage. As a private person you want to
start a business or freelance, you'll be freer to do it if you don't
have the fear that you won't have healthcare for you and your kids. In a
way it's a stimulus for innovation. And somehow it's kind, knowing that
a sick kid would get care event if the parents are fucked up looser that
don't bother to care about that.

A nation should care about it's people, that's what nations are made
of... people.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-29 8:55 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.

I know know where you live, but here there is a principle of
"Responsible government" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_government.

In a nutshell a elected member of parliament (whatever if he's an mp, minister, prime-minister) is accountable legally for he's action and
decision, but also for the department they represent or are responsible
for. There is no principle of "presidential immunity". Is it perfect?
no. But administrator and elected people do go to jail when they are
found committing frauds and other crime.

When I look how it work at Google and Facebook something, it's
definitely not a gov't. Seem that you can get away with a lot, as long
as the bring money in, morality and fairness just a detail overseen when
it's in the way.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-29 10:10 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of people

Yet it seem to show that in country where it's supposed to be run more efficiently by private company it doesn't get cheaper like it would be initially thought.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-29 10:13 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

HusTler wrote to Dumas Walker <=-

Hu> For even more clarity healthcare in the United States cost twice as
Hu> much more then other countries. That's why the US is the highest on the
Hu> list.

That's partly because of price controls in other countries.

If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.

But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.

Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?

Remember Martin Shkreli?

What I find odd is that here price of medication is cheaper and contrary
to what people in the US know, it's not covered by healthcare. People
pays for it, so either you buy an insurance to cover them or it's out of
your pockets. But now some province force you into theirs plan if you
don't have one from your work ect. We do manufacture locally and do
research, Montreal is still see as hub in biomedical research. How come
it get to be less expensive? Not that much price fixing.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

But you can't keep dual citizenship then.

Yes, that is one thing we cannot (usually) have. There may be some
exceptions but I am not aware of them.

But I get it you would want a president that is clear of allegiance to another country.

I think that was the idea back then for sure, especially someone who might
have an allegiance to the Crown that we'd just freed ourselves from. :)


* SLMR 2.1a * "Stamp Collection?? Ha-Ha!" - Nelson

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

We have/had the same thing in the USA. If your mother comes into the country and then gives birth, you are a citizen. As you pointed out, some parents do that, then use the kid as an "anchor baby" to try to get citizenship for themselves.

I think I heard they repealed that, at least for non-citizens giving birth in t
e US, since there were many people coming to the US to give birth so their chil
would have US citizenship. But maybe I'm wrong.

I know we were trying to but I am not certain if we did or not, either?

Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you have to >ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In some ways I'm not s
re why that's a requirement - Someone could have been born abroad to US citizen
and moved back to the US at an early age and grew up in the US. In that case,
I think it's a bit unfair if they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w
nted to.

I think it goes back to allegiances to other countries. They didn't want anyone who might have one, especially to the British.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Hired goons????" - Homer

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Nightfox to IB Joe on Fri Jan 29 2021 08:21 am

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: IB Joe to Nightfox on Thu Jan 28 2021 05:57 pm

Not sure if they'd follow it to the letter now.. Ted Cruz born in
Canada, but a US citizen... John McCain born somewhere else,
military base... he's a US citizen... I think Trump proved Obama
wasn't a citizen and he became President. There U go...

Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.

obama's mother was a flake. i'm pretty sure it's entirely possible that he was born in another country but someone did her a favor and had it be the usa. and i'm okay with that. that birth cert that obama provided was some pdf online that wasnt rasterized and you could drag and drop shit around on it. you cant do that with a scan.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Ennev to Dr. What on Fri Jan 29 2021 03:03 pm

Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?

Remember Martin Shkreli?

What I find odd is that here price of medication is cheaper and contrary to what people in the US know, it's not covered by healthcare. People pays for it, so either you buy an insurance to cover them or it's out of your pockets. But now some province force you into theirs plan if you don't have one from your work ect. We do manufacture locally and do research, Montreal is still see as hub in biomedical research. How come it get to be less expensive? Not that much price fixing.

martin also pointed out that the drug companies have programs so people dont have to go without drugs. the pharm companies want to gouge the insurance companies, not the people. also making money off of drugs is what funds research into other drugs. i dont think the guy was evil, he was just a smart guy with loose morals. whats messed up is they got him for white collar crime. all of his investors ended up better off because of his little unethical switcheroo with the funds.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Nightfox to IB Joe on Fri Jan 29 2021 08:21 am

Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.

Like everything else in American politics, if someone in power says it, it must be true. Obama was born in Hawaii, McCain born on a US base, and Cruz was born in Canada. Who cares. I think the "natural born Citizen" clause of the Constitution is flawed. If you've lived here since childhood and are an American citizen (naturalized), that's good enough for me.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to NIGHTFOX on Fri Jan 29 2021 06:44 pm

Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you
have to ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not s re why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizen and moved back to the US at an early
age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if
they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w nted to.

I think it goes back to allegiances to other countries. They didn't want anyone who might have one, especially to the British.

I can understand that. But for someone who came to the US as a child or immediately after being born, it seems rather unlikely they would have strong alliances with other countries. Someone born in the US could even decide to switch sides at some point.

Nightfox

Arelor wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <6013E9A8.3709.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
@REPLY: <601337FB.20007.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Ennev on
Thu Jan 28 2021 09:19 pm

Ennev wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <6012BAD5.11337.dove-debate@mtlgeek.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
On 2021-01-27 9:21 a.m., Boraxman wrote:

By the way, the government is like a big company. We are all

shareholders

,

bu

t

those that line their pockets are the big shareholders, we are just those

that

own a handful and have little sway at AGMs.

Yes, governments should be seen like this.

I don't think they should by seen like this, not at all. The relationship

be

tween the citizen and their government is not

based on 'stakeholderism' but duty. There is a mutual duty.

We create insitutions to serve us. Shareholders don't create the company,

or

even if they did, it wouldn't be to serve them

Big difference there.

The government PURPOSE is to ensure that the civilisation, the nation that

we

build works effectively for our wellbeing and

sustained existance as a people. Our duty to the government is to protect

ou

r nation by ensuring that the government can do

this effectively (and this in part involves policing the government).

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!

Thing is, people serves their own interests.

A public officer is "people" first and "public officer" second, or
third, or forth....

There is a lot of people who seem to think that administration personal are magical light beings that are public officers first and foremost.
Fat chance. If you are a town hall secretary it serves your interests better that more secretaries are hired, so you have to work less, than having a bumpy road you never use repaired.

An administrator that has enough power WILL try to work less and make
more money out of his position even if it is at the expense of the
whole organization.

The second thing is, big corporations suffer pretty much this same problem. The main difference is that you can opt out of being a
customer of most corporations or at least reduce your relationship with them, so if they fail to keep their house tidy, it is a bit less of a problem.

The government or the town hall can send the cops to shove a baton up
your ass if you fail to purchase their services via taxes. And if you complain that the mayor is using all the money to fund his own
propaganda campaign instead of helping the poor (for example) and therefore has no legit claim on your tax money, you'll get labeled a raving lunatic.

My point is that governments are supposed to be something mystical and magical, but are built by people, in order to pursue that people's interests. If it didn't pursue their interests, they would not bother
to build it. All this talk about a government made by the whole
population for the whole population is jjust propaganda spread so the population keeps sustaining the lifestyle of the Administration's
agents.

I agree. This is why the USA is an empire. The narrative is that the government itself is an entity that serves the state, not "a people". You know, the idea that anyone that comes to the USA and plays by the rules is now an American, and the governmet should serve them. WHO does the government serve exactly? Well, it isn't any specific people because its supposed to serve anyone who happens to be there equally. So it can only really serve itself.

This might sound very unPC, but I think the modern idea that countries are just administrative regions, which can consist of anyone and everyone is the death of us. It has to be for OUR posterity, OUR nation, not other people, not a nation defined by the government, but a people, an organic nation.

Because it is forbidden to see any alternative, the USA WILL COLLAPSE, because it is an empire. Empires are empires first, and nations second. Rome was that way too. When it become more about the Empire than about being Roman, it was on the path to collapse.

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Dr. What wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <60143B0E.42579.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <601211A2.19995.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>

Boraxman wrote to Dr. What <=-

Scandinavia is as Capitalist as any other Capitalist country.
Government spending isn't Socialism. Public ownership of the means of production is.

You need to get educated on "socialism" if you think it's only about public ownership.

The means of production are privately owned. Technically, a country could be called more "Socialist", yet have lower taxes.

By the way, the government is like a big company.

Then how do we fire the unelected, unappointed bureaucrats in our gov't who set the rules?

We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.

I didn't realise as an employee, I can fire those that run my company???

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Dream Master wrote to Nightfox <=-

Ted Cruz and John McCain were never actually elected president of the US though. And I hadn't heard anything about Trump proving Obama wasn't a citizen.. I know there's a controvercy about where Obama was born, but I thought there was enough evidence showing he was born in Hawaii.

Like everything else in American politics, if someone in power
says it, it must be true. Obama was born in Hawaii, McCain born
on a US base, and Cruz was born in Canada. Who cares. I think
the "natural born Citizen" clause of the Constitution is flawed.
If you've lived here since childhood and are an American citizen (naturalized), that's good enough for me.

Thankfully, "good enough for you" isn't good enough.

You libs would like to gut the Constitution to better suit your
agenda, but it's not gonna happen. The founders foresaw the likes of
you. It's the only thing between you and tyranny, and you don't even
realize it.



... Then the manure hit the rotary air displacement unit.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Sat Jan 30 2021 08:52 am

You libs would like to gut the Constitution to better suit your
agenda, but it's not gonna happen. The founders foresaw the likes of
you. It's the only thing between you and tyranny, and you don't even realize it.

See, that's where you're wrong. I completely support the Constitution and wish it would be upheld in its entirety. If I only knew what you believed in:

- Establishment of religion or prohibiting a free press -- America should separate itself from a "defined" religion, Christianity, and laws shouldn't be made in support of some "mystical book". Free press, I completely agree. Yet, the free press should clearly indicate whether an article is factual versus opinion / fiction.

- The right of the people to keep and bear Arms -- I completely support this. Everyone should be able to own guns with a stipulation. If you're a felon or have been accused or prosecuted for domestic violence, or have a mental illness, than you shouldn't be able to own a gun.

- Unreasonable searches and seizure -- Again, completely agree.

- Protecting against double jeopardy and self-incrimination -- Again, completely agree.

- Speedy and public trial -- Again, completely agree.

- Trial by jury -- Again, completely agree.

- Excessive bail or fines -- Again, completely agree, yet it is used to punish the poor more than it is help them.

- Denial or disparaging others -- Again, the government shouldn't infringe upon my personal rights including the right to an abortion.

- No new powers or rights to the states -- the states need to follow federal requirements and laws.

So, where am I disagreeing? I'm not. I believe in our Bill of Rights. Do you?

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

You libs would like to gut the Constitution to better suit your
agenda, but it's not gonna happen. The founders foresaw the likes of
you. It's the only thing between you and tyranny, and you don't even realize it.

See, that's where you're wrong. I completely support the
Constitution and wish it would be upheld in its entirety.

Hmmmm.... really? Hold that thought...

- The right of the people to keep and bear Arms -- I completely
support this. Everyone should be able to own guns with a
stipulation.

Ahhhh! So, right there, you contradict yourself. You *DON'T*
completely support this, because...... there is no "stipulation". You
left out the most important line of the 2nd Amendment: "...shall not
be infringed." Putting stipulations on it is...... infringement.

If you're a felon or have been accused or prosecuted for domestic violence, or have a mental illness, than you shouldn't be able to
own a gun.

While I do agree with the above, for the most part, it again is in contradiction with the 2nd Amendment. Also, it is *COMPLETELY*
unrealistic and un-enforceable. For example, I'd hazard a guess that
MOST people with mental illness are never diagnosed. Also, what if
you're a felon because of some completely non-violent crime. Should
that take away your right to enjoy the sport of skeet shooting? Who
gets to decide these questions? You? Me? Who?

<SNIP stuff that I agree with>

- Denial or disparaging others -- Again, the government shouldn't
infringe upon my personal rights including the right to an
abortion.

But it's OK if they infringe upon your right to own a firearm?

Where do you draw the line? See? The essence of the problem, right
there.

So, where am I disagreeing? I'm not. I believe in our Bill of
Rights. Do you?

I think I pointed out a few ways that you disagree, right there above.

Yes, I do believe in it.



... Forbidden fruit is responsible for many a bad jam.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Nightfox to Dumas Walker on Sat Jan 30 2021 10:06 am

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to NIGHTFOX on Fri Jan 29 2021 06:44 pm

Yeah, I think one of the qualifications to be US president is that you
have to ctually be born in the US, even if you're a US citizen. In
some ways I'm not s re why that's a requirement - Someone could have
been born abroad to US citizen and moved back to the US at an early
age and grew up in the US. In that case, I think it's a bit unfair if
they wouldn't qualify to be US president if they w nted to.

I think it goes back to allegiances to other countries. They didn't wan anyone who might have one, especially to the British.

I can understand that. But for someone who came to the US as a child or immediately after being born, it seems rather unlikely they would have stron alliances with other countries. Someone born in the US could even decide to switch sides at some point.

Nightfox

I was born out of my current province of residence, in a province that is regarded as highly antagonistic towards my current province of residence.

I was born in that province and lived there until I was 3 years old. Then the family moved back to my current province of residence.

If I tell anybody I was born out or my family lived out for years we may face a bit of scorn or mistrust because we could have been infected by their ideas or something.


Maybe they are right. If there was interprovince war at this point I would take the side of the province I was born in, because this one is a cess pit that can only be fixed with nukes.


I think if a family moves out of country, have a baby and rise it for 3 to 5 years in foreign soil, there is a certain (small) risk that they will bring back a son carrying foreigner ideas, if not foreigner family interests.

Most of my customers nowadays are in this outsider antagonistic province, because there is where my family established friendships and business contacts when I was born.

I don't think I would make it into a law that only somebody born in the province may become a high rank politician in the province, but I certainly see the logic in passing it. Even if I think the risk is a bit overblown.

Just thought I could share this.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

We don't/can't. Therefore the gov't is NOT like a big company.

I know know where you live, but here there is a principle of
"Responsible government" (

That's an oxymoron and completely outside reality.

In a nutshell a elected member of parliament (whatever if he's an mp, minister, prime-minister) is accountable legally for he's action and decision, but also for the department they represent or are responsible for.

Not in the U.S. Gov't officials have legal immunity for their decisions. Bureaucrats in agencies
like the EPA, for example, are unelected and unappointed. It's near impossible to fire them. They are more
likely to die or retire than be fired.


... I'm not lost, I'm "locationally challenged."
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

On 2021-01-29 10:10 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of people

Yet it seem to show that in country where it's supposed to be run more efficiently by private company it doesn't get cheaper like it would be initially thought.

Yes, but like I said, those are "forest numbers" and don't take many other things into account.

One of the things I already pointed out was the price controls in other countries - which will make
certain drugs and procedures cost less there, but will make it more expensive in countries without
price controls.


... A short cut is the longest distance between two points.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

That's partly because of price controls in other countries.

If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.

But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.

Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?

Remember Martin Shkreli?

Never heard of him.

What I find odd is that here price of medication is cheaper and
contrary to what people in the US know, it's not covered by healthcare. People pays for it, so either you buy an insurance to cover them or
it's out of your pockets. But now some province force you into theirs
plan if you don't have one from your work ect. We do manufacture
locally and do research, Montreal is still see as hub in biomedical research. How come it get to be less expensive? Not that much price fixing.

I already explained that above. Please actually read it.


... When all else fails, spend money!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2021-01-31 10:38 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

Not in the U.S. Gov't officials have legal immunity for their decisions. Bureaucrats in agencies
like the EPA, for example, are unelected and unappointed. It's near impossible
to fire them. They are more
likely to die or retire than be fired.

Then you can really call that a democracy :-(

Make me think of EU where is more and more ruled and regulated by mostly
non elected people that will dictate with theirs "directive" law that
need to be adopted by respective EU countries.

How long will this last? Look that stunt this weekend with UK. OH we
have a deal but we'll suspend it. Already sound like the big guys
kicking the small ones.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 2021-01-31 10:39 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

One of the things I already pointed out was the price controls in other countries - which will make
certain drugs and procedures cost less there, but will make it more expensive in countries without
price controls.

Most of the time it's for generic medication out of patent.

In a way this system has been going on for years in many countries, it
look sustainable.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

Not in the U.S. Gov't officials have legal immunity for their decisions. Bureaucrats in agencies
like the EPA, for example, are unelected and unappointed. It's near impossible
to fire them. They are more
likely to die or retire than be fired.

Then you can really call that a democracy :-(

Ya, not even close to a democracy.

What's happened over many decades is that more and more of the rule making power has moved to the bureaucracy. Then the legislature (unconstitutionally) ceded authority to the bureaucracy (You might remember the "we have to pass
the law before we can know what's in it" from Pelosi.).

So the legislature basically passes a law that says "Agency X has the authority to make the rules governing Y." So a bunch of unelected, unaccountable
morons get to, effectively, make law.

And the Supreme Court has a policy of defering to the "experts" (supposedly
the people in said bureaucracy).

Make me think of EU where is more and more ruled and regulated by
mostly non elected people that will dictate with theirs "directive" law that need to be adopted by respective EU countries.

I thought that was the main reason the UK wanted out of the EU.

How long will this last? Look that stunt this weekend with UK. OH we
have a deal but we'll suspend it. Already sound like the big guys
kicking the small ones.

That's what happens at the beginning. But it always ends poorly. Usually
for everyone.


... You're not losing more hair, you're gaining more scalp.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

One of the things I already pointed out was the price controls in other countries - which will make
certain drugs and procedures cost less there, but will make it more

expensive

in countries without
price controls.

Most of the time it's for generic medication out of patent.

But the root problem is that if a company makes a medicine, and it costs $5/pill, if a country has a price control on that so that it can only be
sold there for $2/pill.

The company who makes the medicine has a choice:
1. Don't sell it in that country.
2. Sell it for $2/pill in that country, but sell it for $8/pill in countries without price controls.

In a way this system has been going on for years in many countries, it look sustainable.

That's short term think.


... I'm not dead, I'm metabolically challenged.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2021-02-02 8:44 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

En> Make me think of EU where is more and more ruled and regulated by
En> mostly non elected people that will dictate with theirs "directive" law
En> that need to be adopted by respective EU countries.

I thought that was the main reason the UK wanted out of the EU.

It was, and I surprised that others member of the union are OK with that (directives from above).

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

The company who makes the medicine has a choice:
1. Don't sell it in that country.
2. Sell it for $2/pill in that country, but sell it for $8/pill in countries without price controls.

If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will be able to afford the $2/pill any more.


* SLMR 2.1a * SHOCKING TRUTH: 50% of all people are below average....

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to DR. WHAT on Tue Feb 02 2021 04:29 pm

If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will be able to afford the $2/pill any more.

Do you have evidence to prove this claim?

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will be able to afford the $2/pill any more.

Do you have evidence to prove this claim?

It is pretty well known that the prices in the US subsidize the lower
prices charged elsewhere. If we go on price control, either someone else
is going to pay more or we are going to stop having access to some
medications.

Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they
don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the R&D and overhead costs. Nothing is free.


* SLMR 2.1a * If you trade freedom for security, you get neither.

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 1/28/2021 4:57 PM, Nightfox wrote:

In 2018 according to the OECD, the ten countries that spend
the most on healthcare per person are:

United States ($10,586)
Switzerland ($7,317)
Norway ($6,187)
...

I wonder how they count that. Is that just what individual
citizens pay for their own healthcare, or does that also
account for what the government pays in countries where
healhcare is socialized?

As far as I know, it's the total spent on healthcare in the
country divided by the number of citizens.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 2021-02-03 1:56 p.m., Dumas Walker wrote:

Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they
don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the R&D and
overhead costs. Nothing is free.

Yes, but that's it's sad is the trend of concentration, theses pharma
merging is not good for anybody. Limit the numbers of player and the competition that would promote research to give your to your firm an
edge again the other players.

In a lots of field I think I'm watching "highlander" where there can be
only one. Is that capitalism? I don't think so we call it like that
still and believe it hasn't been warped.

I've checked some definition and i see generally this :

"an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of
capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision,
and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are
determined mainly by competition in a free market"

Competition seem to be more and more overrated. And it's harder and
harder for small player to enter the game. Look more like an Oligarchy
of rich and powerful player running the game and rules.

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

On 1/29/2021 6:56 AM, Dr. What wrote:

Going back to the Scandavian countries: many of them are
trying to reduce or eliminate the government programs and
convert them to private.

They should consult with Greece to see what happens when a
government tries to ween the citizens off of the teet.

Oh, ya. They admit it's hard and it will take a LONG time.

Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Unfortunately, nobody in a position to actually propose said
changes has the backbone to do so, and fewer still would vote
for it for fear of backlash and misinformation.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 1/29/2021 8:13 AM, Dr. What wrote:

If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.

Not really, the highest expense of drug companies by a massive margine
is advertising, and even then that has very little to do with pricing,
which is more driven by market economics in the absence of collective bargaining while also having a monopoly on access.

Insurance companies have switched from negotiation to taking positions
in the drug companies. Since they're under a 20% profit margin cap
under Obamacare, they just let the water rise, so they get 20% of a much larger pool of water (increased prices) for the past decade. Not that
it was much better before.

But if other countries only permit the company to sell it for less in
their countries, the company still needs to make up the cost that they incurred developing it.

Since the U.S. has no price controls, guess who eats that extra cost?

They're not covering anything, if they couldn't make money in those
other countries, they wouldn't be selling. It's purely economically driven.

What I'd like to see in this country is a reduction of Patents issued, especially extension patents combined with dual sourcing requirements
for distribution and production as well as a requirement for at least
50% domestic production both for security measures.

I'd also like to see insurance companies required to act with fiduciary responsibility on behalf of their customers and negotiate in good faith
as part of that. Would also like to see federally operated programs (Medicare, Medicaid, VA Medical, Federal Employees/Contractors)
disbanded and replaced with a non-profit insurance corporation that
could act as a ballast to the system as a whole, allowing anyone to
purchase coverage, not just those previously covered under the classes
in the current system.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 1/29/2021 12:53 PM, Ennev wrote:

Amount of money spent on health care (private and public) / number of
people

Yet it seem to show that in country where it's supposed to be run more efficiently by private company it doesn't get cheaper like it would be initially thought.

The US is still highly regulated and a very large portion of the
population is covered by various federal and state level programs, which
are very inefficient, with some really weird rules regarding billing.

This is not helped by the fact that many insurance companies stopped negotiating nearly as much on pricing since Obamacare and simply let the
costs rise, increasing premiums so they make more from a bigger pie,
since they are capped at 20% margins. They've also taken positions in
the various drug companies, and even retail channels.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 1/29/2021 4:48 PM, Dumas Walker wrote:

Part of the reason it costs more here is that we are footing the bill for other countries to have socialized medicine. Like, we pay extra to cover
the R&D and effectively subsidize the health care in other countries.

If we ever socialize ours, there are going to be some countries who are
going to have to start charging their citizens more (raise their taxes or actually charge them). That gravy train would end.

That isn't as true as you might think... it's largely economics driven
and comes down to a lack of collective bargaining against pricing models combined with monopoly on distribution.

R&D is dwarfed by marketting expenses and even production is often
higher than the R&D budgets.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 1/29/2021 10:05 PM, Dream Master wrote:

Like everything else in American politics, if someone in power
says it, it must be true. Obama was born in Hawaii, McCain
born on a US base, and Cruz was born in Canada. Who cares.
I think the "natural born Citizen" clause of the Constitution
is flawed. If you've lived here since childhood and are an
American citizen (naturalized), that's good enough for me.

The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

Ennev wrote to Dr. What <=-

I thought that was the main reason the UK wanted out of the EU.

It was, and I surprised that others member of the union are OK with
that (directives from above).

Well, I was surprised (at first) at the number of people here in the U.S.
who are OK with the gov't having no accountability.

But this has been planned for generations now. The dumbing down of the schools, which produces people who can't think for themselves. We have
too many people who are, mentally, children and feel a *need* to be
dependant on someone.

"Just give up some of your rights and give us more power and we'll
keep you safe." is what they are told. But they forget the rights
they've already given up for safety and never gotten any safety - only
more tyranny.


... I may be wrong, but I'm never in doubt!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dumas Walker wrote to DR. WHAT <=-

The company who makes the medicine has a choice:
1. Don't sell it in that country.
2. Sell it for $2/pill in that country, but sell it for $8/pill in countries without price controls.

If the US ever goes to price controls or socializes, no one else will
be able to afford the $2/pill any more.

The pill won't ever be created because:
1. The company will not be able to recoup the cost of creating it.
2. The gov't, who controls everything, won't allow it to be created
because it will cause one of their cronies to lose money
or
3. The bureaucrats won't be able to do it. Because they are incompetant.

Not many people remember that governments tried to create the airplane
before the Wright Brothers and all their efforts failed. No one spends
someone else's money as wisely as their own.


... You have only a very small head and must live within it.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dumas Walker wrote to DREAM MASTER <=-

Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the
R&D and overhead costs. Nothing is free.

Socialists don't understand economics. If they did, they wouldn't be socialists.


... I may be wrong, but I'm never in doubt!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2021-02-04 9:21 a.m., Dr. What wrote:

"Just give up some of your rights and give us more power and we'll
keep you safe." is what they are told. But they forget the rights
they've already given up for safety and never gotten any safety - only
more tyranny.

Yeah


“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

― Benjamin Franklin

---
� Synchronet � MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Tracker1 to Dr. What on Thu Feb 04 2021 03:57 am

Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

they love dipping into that money.
i would have been better off with it going into a private account or something like a 401k. i could probably retire right now, in fact.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Tracker1 to Dr. What on Thu Feb 04 2021 03:57 am

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Absolutely not.

Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals to control its investment is insane. The current system where the government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is insufficient based upon how the government currently borrows from the trust. Placing Social Security funds into something akin to the market, but giving zero control to participants, would demonstrate our governments desire to watch American industry grow at the same time as giving its citizens the impetus to work hard for a good retirement.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Tracker1 to Dream Master on Thu Feb 04 2021 04:17 am

The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.

So, my father, who immigrated to the US in the late 40s as Stateless is less of an American than you or I? He is a citizen of the United States, has held TS and TS/C level clearances, yet can't be president because of the natural born clause? He has zero foreign conflicts of interest or interference. But, since I was born in the United States, I can become president. I have zero history as an American. Hell, when someone asks me my heritage, I respond, "Euro-Trash".

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

R&D is dwarfed by marketting expenses and even production is often
higher than the R&D budgets.

I can see where the marketing budgets could play a role for sure. A lot of these supposed miracle drugs do a lot of advertising. Of course, we'd
never know how likely we are to die from taking them if it weren't for the catchy ads! :)


* SLMR 2.1a * Optimist: A Yugo owner with a trailer hitch!

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Even if we tell the drug companies they cannot make a profit, and they don't turn around and exit the market, someone has to pay to cover the R&D and overhead costs. Nothing is free.

Socialists don't understand economics. If they did, they wouldn't be socialists.

I cannot disagree with that at all. :)


* SLMR 2.1a * Engineers: often wrong, seldom in doubt.

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

But this has been planned for generations now. The dumbing down of the schools, which produces people who can't think for themselves. We have
too many people who are, mentally, children and feel a *need* to be
dependant on someone.

I think some of it was planned when the Iron Curtain was still up. It fell
but the people in this country who had bought into the cause continued what they had started.


* SLMR 2.1a * No viruses detected. Must be a pair of Nanites.

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Dream Master to Tracker1 on Thu Feb 04 2021 11:59 am

schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Absolutely not.

Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals to control its investment is insane.

tell that to my huge 401k.

The current system where the government places

Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is

the current system is dogshit.

it's like the bank account my mom set up for me for when i turned 18. she put money in it every week [she said]. but she was a single mom and liked to party so she dipped into it all the time. she would always count on winfalls to put a little bit more back in later to replace what she took. that never happened.


so when i withdrew that account it had like 180 bucks in it. wasnt enough for college.

anybody that trusts the government to manage their money is a fucking idiot. they take and take and take and it's never enough.

i'd have a ton saved up if i had a personal account that i could invest. any fool could see the benefit to that.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Absolutely not.

Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals
to control its investment is insane. The current system where
the government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is insufficient based upon how the government currently borrows from the trust. Placing Social
Security funds into something akin to the market, but giving zero
control to participants, would demonstrate our governments desire
to watch American industry grow at the same time as giving its
citizens the impetus to work hard for a good retirement.

Spoken like a good little koolaid-slurping party-line (toe-the-line)
Dimocrat.

Sure, give the government complete control over everything, with "zero
control to participants" (your words) would be a great idea..... <NOT>
What could go wrong?

The correct solution is to not allow the fucking government to fucking
borrow from the "trust" at all, under any circumstance. Like it was meant
to be done. Like the law requires. It's not the government's money.

Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-

The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.

So, my father, who immigrated to the US in the late 40s as
Stateless is less of an American than you or I? He is a citizen
of the United States, has held TS and TS/C level clearances, yet
can't be president because of the natural born clause? He has
zero foreign conflicts of interest or interference. But, since I
was born in the United States, I can become president. I have
zero history as an American. Hell, when someone asks me my
heritage, I respond, "Euro-Trash".

He's not "less of an American", no. He's just not eligible to become President, by law.

You don't actually KNOW for certain that he has no foreign conflicts. No offense intended by that statement, but it's true.


... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Thu Feb 04 2021 09:07 pm

Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?

I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's communism, it's not. We have more than enough money to bail out large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure the rich keep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care about them.

So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.

I pay more than enough in taxes every year.

I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.

Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school, don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Thu Feb 04 2021 09:11 pm

He's not "less of an American", no. He's just not eligible to become President, by law.

Oh, by law, I completely agree.

You don't actually KNOW for certain that he has no foreign conflicts. No offense intended by that statement, but it's true.

He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.

But, you're right, you never truly know.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Dream Master to Gamgee on Fri Feb 05 2021 08:10 am

Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you o member of your family go to school, don't take any federal subsidized studen loans. Oh, and the roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

That argument would work better if you gave him the possibility of stopping paying for all those things before refusing to use them.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

anybody that trusts the government to manage their money is a fucking idiot. ey take and take and take and it's never enough.

No sh1t. Our state had one of the best retirement systems in the nation.
One governor decided to dip his hands in it during his last year in office
and set a precident. Within 5 years, we went from one of the best (so good
the UAW was trying to unionize office workers to get their hands on it) to being "better than Illinois" which means deep in the doo for those who are
not familiar with what they tried to do to theirs a few short years back.


* SLMR 2.1a * We're lost, yes.....but we're making good time.

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?

I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where healthcare, retirem
t, education, and basic income are part of living in America. You can sit the
thinking that it's communism, it's not. We have more than enough money to ba
out large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure the rich ep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care about them.

The US government spends more on health care, per person, than any other country.


* SLMR 2.1a * Limit Congress to 2 terms: one in office, one in jail!

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

You don't actually KNOW for certain that he has no foreign conflicts. No offense intended by that statement, but it's true.

He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.

If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.


* SLMR 2.1a * Windows isn't crippleware: it's "Functionally Challenged"

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

Why don't you just admit that you're a freaking communist?

I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.

Sure it is. None of those items above are anything that anybody is
"entitled" to. That's where you commies (Democrats) get it wrong. They
are things to strive for, to work hard for, to plan for, and to hopefully achieve. They're not promised or guaranteed, and that's how it should be.

We have more than enough money to bail out
large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure
the rich keep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care
about them.

You describe the Democrat party quite well. Especially the part about
sending money overseas, and wasting it on freeloaders/abusers.

So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.

Not just in "my eyes". Just a simple fact.

I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.

So do I. So does everybody. What's your point here? That we're
squandering our tax revenue? I do agree with that.

Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things for decades, why
shouldn't I be able to use them.

What you prefer, as a communist, is that *OTHERS* pay for moochers and dirtbags. Everyone should be EQUALLY poor, right? Meanwhile the elite
ruling class lives high on the hog. That's what you want?



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to DREAM MASTER on Fri Feb 05 2021 05:25 pm

He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.

If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.

My father and his family could not declare they were from Switzerland or Germany as they had no papers to back the claim. Switzerland, because of the German occupation, refused to provide them amy formal validation of their nationality. Germany refused to give them any declaration of their nationality on their exit from Switzerland. Therefore, they were "stateless".

My father is an American. He served in the USAF and is a Naturalized citizen.

Dream Master
Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS


---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Dream Master to Gamgee on Fri Feb 05 2021 08:10 am

Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school, don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

Socialism and communism are scary, they take away what made America great (Competition) and makes the Leftist eliteist's richer and richer while greatly reducing the middle class.

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.
Your logic dosen't work in the real world.

---
■ Synchronet ■ outwestbbs.com - the Outwest BBS

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Gamgee to Dream Master on Fri Feb 05 2021 08:59 pm

I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.

Sure it is. None of those items above are anything that anybody is "entitled" to. That's where you commies (Democrats) get it wrong. They are things to strive for, to work hard for, to plan for, and to hopefully achieve. They're not promised or guaranteed, and that's how it should be.

Why should I work for healthcare? What happens if I become unemployed and need healthcare or one of my children? Just wither away and die? That's the position you are taking. Healthcare should be a right, not something we should pay through the roof for to hope they'll pay the bills. This isn't a communist or socialist thing, this is a "living" thing. People should go into debt to stay healthy.

Strive, work hard, plan, hopefully achieve? Wow, how do you live with yourself? Life shouldn't be about paying medical bills after medical bills and insurance and more and more just to get to Point C.

We have more than enough money to bail out
large corporations, send money to foreign countries, and ensure
the rich keep getting richer, but the little guys, we never care
about them.

You describe the Democrat party quite well. Especially the part about sending money overseas, and wasting it on freeloaders/abusers.

Israel? Afghanistan? We keep sending more money overseas. It doesn't matter which party, they both do the same.

So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.

Not just in "my eyes". Just a simple fact.

I'm hoping you learn more about the differences between Democratic Socialism, Socialism, Communism, and fascism.

I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.

So do I. So does everybody. What's your point here? That we're squandering our tax revenue? I do agree with that.

Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take
unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things for decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.

So, stop paying your taxes. Stop using everything the government secures for you going forward.

What you prefer, as a communist, is that *OTHERS* pay for moochers and dirtbags. Everyone should be EQUALLY poor, right? Meanwhile the elite ruling class lives high on the hog. That's what you want?

Who cares? The entire Bible Belt and South is some of the poorest states in the country--and they all vote Republican. How can we fix this? Stop calling people moochers and dirtbags and treat people equally.

Oh, well, you'll never get it.
Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Denn to Dream Master on Fri Feb 05 2021 09:39 pm

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.
Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Dream Master to Gamgee on Sat Feb 06 2021 12:46 am

Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things
decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.

So, stop paying your taxes. Stop using everything the government secures for you going forward.

If he stops paying taxes he gets raped in prison and shunned by society.

If he votes for a candidate that will allow him not to pay those taxes a mob will show up and break havoc because opting out of
the system is not socially acceptable.

In fact you kinda did when you brought up that people is entitled to the work of other people (aka I have the right to health
care regardless of whether I contribute to sustaining it or not). You criticised his position because you think it is socially
unaceptable.

No matter how you paint it, taxes are the way a powerful group extracts money from people, by giving those people the illusion
they have a say in the matter.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure
my neighbors can live.

Yeah, that's much better than making the neighbors pull their own weight.

Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.



... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

I believe everyone is entitled to living a good life where
healthcare, retirement, education, and basic income are part of
living in America. You can sit there thinking that it's
communism, it's not.

Sure it is. None of those items above are anything that anybody is "entitled" to. That's where you commies (Democrats) get it wrong. They
are things to strive for, to work hard for, to plan for, and to hopefully achieve. They're not promised or guaranteed, and that's how it should be.

Why should I work for healthcare?

Because it's something you want, or need. Just like everything else.
Food, housing, a new car, a college education, toys/hobbies, EVERYTHING. That's how you get things in this world. You work for them. Duh.

What happens if I become unemployed and need healthcare or one of my children? Just wither away and die? That's the position you are taking.

First of all, don't become unemployed. If you do, get another job. There
are "programs" (such as MedicAid) out there for those who TRULY need the
help, and those programs are valuable and useful. I support things like
that. The problem is that they are so blatantly abused that they can't
serve their actual purpose. The overseers of such programs COULD fix
those issues, but they choose not to.

Healthcare should be a right, not something we should pay through
the roof for to hope they'll pay the bills. This isn't a
communist or socialist thing, this is a "living" thing. People
should go into debt to stay healthy.

It isn't a right. Where do you draw the line? Should food and a house be
a "right" also? How about a new car every 5 years, courtesy of the
gub'mint? Sure, let the people who work their assess off pay more taxes
so those who don't feel like working can have the same things that those
who do work have. The Democrat way. Enslave them for their votes.

Strive, work hard, plan, hopefully achieve? Wow, how do you live
with yourself?

I live with myself just fine, thanks. Yep, those words are basically the formula for the American Dream, and always have been. I know you
Democrats have a hard time understanding such things. Keep trying.

Life shouldn't be about paying medical bills after medical bills and insurance and more and more just to get to Point C.

So, somebody else, some other taxpayer, should pay your (or my) medical
bills? Why? Why not people be responsible for their own selves? Oh! I
know why..... it's that word "responsible". Dems don't like that.

So, does this make me a communist in your eyes? Sure, why not.

Not just in "my eyes". Just a simple fact.

I'm hoping you learn more about the differences between
Democratic Socialism, Socialism, Communism, and fascism.

OK, Bernie. I already know the differences.

I pay more than enough in taxes every year.
I pay more than enough in healthcare costs every year.

So do I. So does everybody. What's your point here? That we're
squandering our tax revenue? I do agree with that.

Do me a favor, when you retire, don't accept your Social Security
funds or Medicare benefits. If you lose your job, don't take
unemployment. If you or a member of your family go to school,
don't take any federal subsidized student loans. Oh, and the
roads, stop driving on them. Your water, you should probably
stop drinking it. God forbid, SOCIALISM! Scary.

Not the same thing. I would figure that a communist would know that. Besides, I've been PAYING for all of those things for decades, why shouldn't I be able to use them.

So, stop paying your taxes. Stop using everything the government
secures for you going forward.

What a stupid thing to say. Stop paying my taxes? So I can get in legal trouble and become a non-contributing member of society? I don't think
so.

What you prefer, as a communist, is that *OTHERS* pay for moochers and dirtbags. Everyone should be EQUALLY poor, right? Meanwhile the elite ruling class lives high on the hog. That's what you want?

Who cares? The entire Bible Belt and South is some of the
poorest states in the country--and they all vote Republican. How
can we fix this? Stop calling people moochers and dirtbags and
treat people equally.

I'm all in favor of treating people equally. You hit the nail on the
head. Let's stop favoring those who CHOOSE to be moochers and dirtbags,
and make them pull their own weight and "earn their keep". Absolutely. But.... The Democrat party won't allow such things, because they'd lose
most of their voter base if they didn't provide them handouts. See?

Oh, well, you'll never get it.

You keep demonstrating that you don't get it. All you want is to continue
the "status quo", and keep the Dem voter base enslaved by your handouts,
so they'll keep voting Dems into office, who will of course continue to provide the handouts. It's a vicious circle, and is the MAIN CAUSE of inequality and poverty in the country today.

When people are faced with a choice of WORK or GO WITHOUT, with no
loopholes, guess which one they'll pick? Before you start spouting off
about those who CAN'T work, yes, there should be programs to support those people. Those programs exist today but are so badly abused that they
can't do what they should be doing, and are a never-ending hole that we
the taxpayers have to dump money into. Remove the moochers and things
would actually work as designed. Again, that doesn't happen because of
the Democrat party.



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Dream Master to Denn on Sat Feb 06 2021 01:49 am

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle
class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live. Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master

That's the point, they can't live with the high tax burdens, and i'm not willing to pay more for people who could work but take welfare and Government programs instead of getting a job.

---
■ Synchronet ■ outwestbbs.com - the Outwest BBS

He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.

If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.

My father is an American. He served in the USAF and is a Naturalized citizen.

You are the one that said he "is truly Stateless," not me.


* SLMR 2.1a * A seminar on Time Travel will be held 2 weeks ago....

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-

Just think what it would take to eliminate Social Security
here in the U.S. and replace it with private saving's plans.

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Unfortunately, nobody in a position to actually propose said
changes has the backbone to do so, and fewer still would vote
for it for fear of backlash and misinformation.

The real reason is the "3-4 decades". Congress-critters don't think in timespans that long. They think in
terms of 'next election'.


... Blessed are the meek, for they make great scapegoats.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-

On 1/29/2021 8:13 AM, Dr. What wrote:

If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
gets factored in to the price of the drug.

Not really,

Yes, really.

the highest expense of drug companies by a massive margine is advertising,

Not even close. Now, that doesn't mean that SOME companies have a huge adversiting budget for SOME drugs.

But for the most part, it's the creation, testing and certification that costs the most.

They're not covering anything, if they couldn't make money in those
other countries, they wouldn't be selling. It's purely economically driven.

Right. Now, if ALL countries have price controls guess what happens? The drug never gets made.

But the discussion was why costs are higher here in the U.S.

What I'd like to see in this country is a reduction of Patents issued,

Then you will see a drop in innovation and many things just never get created.

The purpose of Patents and the like is to give an economic incentive to people to create new things.


... Do witches use Spell-checkers?
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

Why should I work for healthcare?

Because if you don't, you are stealing it from those of us who work.

Don't you understand how socialism works? Don't you understand that for the gov't to pay out, they must
take it from someone else? Socialism is no different than theft and is the most immoral system ever thought of.

What happens if I become unemployed and need healthcare or one of my

children?

Not our problem. Those of us who work have no obligation to help those of you who won't work.
We may do so out of the goodness of our hearts, but we have no OBLIGATION to do it.


... Public Restroom-The only place a flush beats a full house
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.

If you think it a "little more" then you are incredibly naive.

In Scandanavian "Socialism", it's 50% of your income.


... Canadian DOS prompt: EH?\>
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-

Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals to
control its investment is insane.

Only to a socialist. Oh, wait, I forgot who I was replying to.

I was just listening to Dave Ramesy yesterday about when to take retirement.

Without going into all the details, the recommendation is this:
1. Take Social Security at 62 - and take the lower monthly check.
2. Keep working.
3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.
4. Retire later (like 68).

The amount of money you get from the investment account will ALWAYS be more than enough to
cover the difference in your Social Security check than if you had waited until 68 to start
collecting.

Tell me again how the gov't does everything so much better...

The current system where the
government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns approximately 3.6% (in 2014)

How naive! That is total BS. Do you know anything about how Social Security works? Those of us
who are working today are paying for the benefits of the people currently on Social Security. There is
no "trust".

Placing Social Security funds into something
akin to the market, but giving zero control to participants, would demonstrate our governments desire to watch American industry grow at
the same time as giving its citizens the impetus to work hard for a
good retirement.

You should take your comedy show on the road. The gov't has no such desire and hasn't for a long time.
The swamp creatures in our gov't only want returns for themselves and their buddies - not for the
"common man".


... "DOS=HIGH" Hmm, I knew it was on something...
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dumas Walker to DREAM MASTER on Sat Feb 06 2021 10:37 am

He doesn't. He is truly Stateless.

If he is Stateless, then he not an American and shouldn't be President.

My father is an American. He served in the USAF and is a Naturalized citizen.

You are the one that said he "is truly Stateless," not me.

oh, he was just lying
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Dumas Walker wrote to DREAM MASTER <=-

The US government spends more on health care, per person, than any
other country.

Not just the government. Health care is something like 40% of our GDP.

My daughter went into the emergency room for GI issues recently, I'm waiting to receive the bill which will most likely be over $7000 for a couple of
hours of medical care.



... Remove ambiguities and convert to specifics
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Denn wrote to Dream Master <=-

Socialism and communism are scary, they take away what made America
great (Competition) and makes the Leftist eliteist's richer and richer while greatly reducing the middle class.

Compared to the recent bouts of crony capitalism? There hasn't been free market capitalism in years. Campaign contributions, lobbying and monopoly enterprise is where it's at now.

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class. Your logic dosen't work in the real world.

Look at the Trump tax plan - tax cuts for the rich and now, tax increases on people making under $75K for the next few years.


... Remove ambiguities and convert to specifics
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.

Agreed, it makes sense when you think of your community holistically. Makes sense financially when medical/mental health care is treated proactively instead of being treated by an ER visit or a cop with a taser.

Food-insecure working-poor families with kids? Less nutrition, lower health, fewer economic opportunities and a self-perpetuating circle.




... Remove ambiguities and convert to specifics
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Dream Master on Sat Feb 06 2021 08:36 am

Food-insecure working-poor families with kids? Less nutrition, lower health, fewer economic opportunities and a self-perpetuating circle.

i'd like to see one of those. i'm sure mom and dad are sitting at home gettin high and getting govt paychecks.

i grew up poor but we always had food. my mom was working poor.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Dream Master on Sat Feb 06 2021 08:36 am

Dream Master wrote to Denn <=-

Democrats create Social programs that raise taxes on the middle class.

I'm more than willing to spend a little more in taxes to ensure my neighbors can live.

Agreed, it makes sense when you think of your community holistically. Makes sense financially when medical/mental health care is treated proactively instead of being treated by an ER visit or a cop with a taser.

Food-insecure working-poor families with kids? Less nutrition, lower health, fewer economic opportunities and a self-perpetuating circle.

... Remove ambiguities and convert to specifics

The problem with plans issued by the administration is that there is no way of opting out of them.

There are religious organizations in my area running drug prevention campaigns and rehab campaigns for addicts with different degrees of success. Whether you join or throw money in is up to you.

When the administration throws an anti-drug campaign there is no way to get out of the plan if you think it is bonkers or uneffective. The dollar get siphoned out of you regardless of how good the thing works.

I despise the idea that if you oppose tax funded plans it must mean you don't care for the community. Lots of anti-tax anti-gov people I know have been spending more than what their taxes are supposed to be helping locally. Specifically because tax funded plans are not fucking arriving to a lot of people who was promised them.

Everytime the conversation of socialism vs everything else pops out and somebody argues "Would you not be willing to pay a bit more taxes in order to ensure this or that service is available to the poor?" my standard answer is that you may pay "a bit more" but that does not mean the money is put to got use. And not playing that game does not mean you lack empathy. Maybe you don't jump in because you don't think it is gonna work as advertised?

If anything, what lacks empathy is to imply that if somebody does not back a government plan, it means he is a nihilistic motherfucker. Which is what is being heavily implied around here.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Hello Dr. What!

** On Saturday 06.02.21 - 13:43, Dr. What wrote to Dream Master:

I was just listening to Dave Ramesy yesterday about when to take retirement.

Without going into all the details, the recommendation is this:
1. Take Social Security at 62 - and take the lower monthly check.
2. Keep working.
3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What kind would guarantee no losses? There are many kinds. Most
seem to be volatile.

4. Retire later (like 68).

The amount of money you get from the investment account
will ALWAYS be more than enough to cover the difference in
your Social Security check than if you had waited until 68
to start collecting.

Did Ramesy name any specific investment account?

I know one fellow who turned 65 a couple years ago, but opted to
take the higher social security check if he would "retire" at
age 72 (or something like). This is in Canada, so the options
are probably a little different than on the USA.

--- OpenXP 5.0.48
* Origin: Ogg's Dovenet Point (723:320/1.9)
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.

They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more, or the
message is interpreted much differently than I remember it.


* SLMR 2.1a * Man, that lightning sounds clos�~��~�� NO CARRIER

---
� Synchronet � CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-

Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.

They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more, or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember it.

* SLMR 2.1a * Man, that lightning sounds clos¡~¡¡~¡¡ NO CARRIER

---
¡ Synchronet ¡ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

You guys just make stuff up independently before coming here, or is this your fantasyland brainstorming session?


... Your inability to understand something is not a valid argument against it. --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ VAGUE BBS - Vague.ddns.net - Telnet/SSH/RLogin

Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-

Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.

They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more,
or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember
it.

That's a real Blast from the Past. Yep, I remember reading that. A perfect analogy to what's happening today. The difference is that today such an outlook would be considered "cruel" or "not fair", or be "inequality".

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.



... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Vague wrote to Dumas Walker <=-

Better than providing JOBS for them, rather than providing them a handout which enslaves them to their "masters". Oh, but wait.... that wouldn't guarantee that they would vote for you, which is the whole point of
keeping them under your heel. Yeah. The Democrat party way.

They either don't teach "the ant and the grasshopper" any more, or the message is interpreted much differently than I remember it.

You guys just make stuff up independently before coming here, or
is this your fantasyland brainstorming session?

What a strange question. What do you find "made up" in any of the above?



... Do you know where you are?
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Ogg wrote to Dr. What <=-

3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.

What kind would guarantee no losses?

None. But the gov't doesn't guarantee that it will pay out as it promised either. They've reduced Social Security payouts before.

Remember, the gov't isn't investing your SS money. You pay in, and it goes right back out to pay for current benefits. As the Baby Boomers retire
that means more people getting a payout as the number of people paying
in drops.

Did Ramesy name any specific investment account?

No. I didn't listen really closely since I'm not looking at that right now.


... "Graphic Artist seeks Boss with vision impairment."
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

On 2/4/2021 11:59 AM, MRO wrote:

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary,
and it's largely too late as it is... Should have a
reduction schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades
that require participation in a certified, fiduciary
based retirement program, and offsetting participation/
taxation against Social Security. It will cost more for
about 30-40 years, but could then normalize again.

they love dipping into that money.
i would have been better off with it going into a private
account or something like a 401k. i could probably retire
right now, in fact.

Most would be better off having 15% of their post-tax income
going into a Roth-IRA starting at their first job.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 2/4/2021 11:59 AM, Dream Master wrote:

Long term, replacing Social Security will be necessary, and
it's largely too late as it is... Should have a reduction
schedule over the course of say 3-4 decades that require
participation in a certified, fiduciary based retirement
program, and offsetting participation/taxation against Social
Security. It will cost more for about 30-40 years, but
could then normalize again.

Absolutely not.

Replacing Social Security with a system that allows individuals
to control its investment is insane. The current system where
the government places Social Security in a "trust" that earns
approximately 3.6% (in 2014), is insufficient based upon how
the government currently borrows from the trust. Placing Social
Security funds into something akin to the market, but giving
zero control to participants, would demonstrate our governments
desire to watch American industry grow at the same time as
giving its citizens the impetus to work hard for a good retirement.

Except that the system is bankrupt, failing and cannot cover those that
live over 10 years into Social Security, even if the govt didn't dip
into it. The government cannot be trusted not to dip into said funds.
It's better placed under more direct control over those that it should benefit. It could be withdrawn/matched under the current structures
used for Social Security currently and be required, and still work
better than it does.

Social Security requires a larger population each generation, which
works against reducing human impact on the environment.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 2/4/2021 12:05 PM, Dream Master wrote:

The natural born part is to reduce the potential for foreign
conflicts of interrest and interference.

So, my father, who immigrated to the US in the late 40s as
Stateless is less of an American than you or I?

In terms of the ability to hold the office of the president, yes.

He is a citizen of the United States, has held TS and TS/C
level clearances, yet can't be president because of the
natural born clause?

If you want to change it, get started on an ammendment to do so.

He has zero foreign conflicts of interest or interference.
But, since I was born in the United States, I can become
president. I have zero history as an American. Hell, when
someone asks me my heritage, I respond, "Euro-Trash".

That's simply how it is. And given there's no lack of qualified
candidates for the office, it's not really an issue in any case.
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

On 2/6/2021 9:36 AM, Dr. What wrote:

Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-

Tr> On 1/29/2021 8:13 AM, Dr. What wrote:
>
> If a company comes up with a drug to cure XXX, that costs money. That
> gets factored in to the price of the drug.

Tr> Not really,

Yes, really.

Tr> the highest expense of drug companies by a massive margine is advertising,

Not even close. Now, that doesn't mean that SOME companies have a huge adversiting budget for SOME drugs.

But for the most part, it's the creation, testing and certification that costs
the most.

https://s21.q4cdn.com/317678438/files/doc_financials/2020/q4/Q4-2020-PFE-Earnings-Release.pdf

Cost of sales ~40%, R&D 22%.

They're not covering anything, if they couldn't make money in those
other countries, they wouldn't be selling. It's purely economically
driven.

Right. Now, if ALL countries have price controls guess what happens?
The drug never gets made.

I'm not suggesting price controls, only constraints that ensure some
level of licensure and competition.

But the discussion was why costs are higher here in the U.S.

What I'd like to see in this country is a reduction of Patents issued,

Then you will see a drop in innovation and many things just never get created.

The purpose of Patents and the like is to give an economic incentive to people
to create new things.

Oh, you mean like lack of patents on software prevented software from
being written?
--
Michael J. Ryan (tracker1)
+o roughneckbbs.com
---
￭ Synchronet ￭ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.

Exactly. They would rather take the middle class down than raise the poor
up. Probably because it is easier.


* SLMR 2.1a * I have a speech impediment ... my foot.

---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.

As soon as you hear "ruling class elite" you know who you're talking to.

Exactly. They would rather take the middle class down than raise the
poor up. Probably because it is easier.

I though all the "handouts" the Socialist Dems want to give away in their social programs was a problem?

I just need to know whether I should hate them for not helping all these PEEOPLE who are saying they NEED help, or do I hate them for helping all THESE people who are SAYING they need help?


... That's just incredible! As in... it's just not credible.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ VAGUE BBS - Vague.ddns.net - Telnet:23/SSH:22/RLogin:513

Re: when to take retirement.
By: Dr. What to Ogg on Mon Feb 08 2021 09:12 am

Ogg wrote to Dr. What <=-

3. Put the Social Security check into an investment account.

What kind would guarantee no losses?

None. But the gov't doesn't guarantee that it will pay out as it promised either. They've reduced Social Security payouts before.

Remember, the gov't isn't investing your SS money. You pay in, and it goes right back out to pay for current benefits. As the Baby Boomers retire
that means more people getting a payout as the number of people paying
in drops.

well they use that money for random shit. it's their buffer. they dip into the cookie jar whenever they feel like it.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dumas Walker on Sun Feb 07 2021 09:01 pm

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.

I believe what you are saying is a poor mischaracterization of the Democrat Party goal. Why can't we level the playing field? Why can't we bring up the poor and bring down the rich? Why should multi-millionaires command more authority in this country than that of the lower to middle class? How much money is too much, how little money is too little? Leveling the playing field allows all of us to have a say in our government process, a say in how we live, and a say in how we ensure everyone is protected.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: when to take retirement.
By: Dr. What to Ogg on Mon Feb 08 2021 09:12 am

Remember, the gov't isn't investing your SS money. You pay in, and it goes right back out to pay for current benefits. As the Baby Boomers retire that means more people getting a payout as the number of people paying
in drops.

My oldest son (21) made a statement to me the other day, "I don't think I'll have Social Security when I retire." I looked at him and nodded in agreement. Something must be done to correct Social Security as the current model is heavily flawed. I don't agree with an individualized investment model but something in between would work.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Tracker1 to Dream Master on Mon Feb 08 2021 03:27 pm

Except that the system is bankrupt, failing and cannot cover those that live over 10 years into Social Security, even if the govt didn't dip
into it. The government cannot be trusted not to dip into said funds. It's better placed under more direct control over those that it should benefit. It could be withdrawn/matched under the current structures
used for Social Security currently and be required, and still work
better than it does.

Thinking about this, you're definitely convincing me. Social Security will become insolvent over the next ten years and that will be bad for a lot of us born in the late 60s and early 70s. I'm going to do some more research on this line of thinking. Thank you.

Social Security requires a larger population each generation, which
works against reducing human impact on the environment.

Agreed. The population growth in America has definitely broke the system that was intended to provide us income in our retirement.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

@MSGID: <60228F74.1178.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6020B19F.3933.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dumas Walker on
Sun Feb 07 2021 09:01 pm

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.

I believe what you are saying is a poor mischaracterization of the Democrat Party goal. Why can't we level the playing field? Why can't
we bring up the poor and bring down the rich? Why should multi-millionaires command more authority in this country than that of
the lower to middle class? How much money is too much, how little
money is too little? Leveling the playing field allows all of us to
have a say in our government process, a say in how we live, and a say
in how we ensure everyone is protected.

We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.

Their party goal is clearly, judging from their actions, the maintenance of a liberal world order and the reign of a elite consisting of those already rich and powerful.

When I judge a political party, I don't look at what they put on the label, but rather the contents of the bottle, which is usually something completely different.


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Dream Master wrote to Tracker1 <=-

@MSGID: <6022947B.1184.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6021BACB.4826.dove-debate@roughneckbbs.com>
Re: Re: move to Canada they say
By: Tracker1 to Dream Master on
Mon Feb 08 2021 03:27 pm

Except that the system is bankrupt, failing and cannot cover those that live over 10 years into Social Security, even if the govt didn't dip
into it. The government cannot be trusted not to dip into said funds.
It's better placed under more direct control over those that it should benefit. It could be withdrawn/matched under the current structures
used for Social Security currently and be required, and still work
better than it does.

Thinking about this, you're definitely convincing me. Social Security will become insolvent over the next ten years and that will be bad for
a lot of us born in the late 60s and early 70s. I'm going to do some
more research on this line of thinking. Thank you.

Social Security requires a larger population each generation, which
works against reducing human impact on the environment.

Agreed. The population growth in America has definitely broke the
system that was intended to provide us income in our retirement.

But consider this, even though the proportion of the population which needs support due to old age is higher, aren't we far more productive thanks to technology?


If resources were better distributed, this wouldn't be as much of a problem. In Australia, housing is ridiculously expensive, so people can't really afford to pay higher taxes because they are mortgaged to the hilt. Speculators hoard the wealth and the government scratches it head, imports people to boost the population then finds that population growth necessitates spending on infrastructure. Also, importing working age people makes the demographic problem worse, as these new additions are closer to retirement than native born, and also often bring in their parents and family.

The problem goes deeper than merely social securty, it is the very fundamental basis of our economic system which is flawed, in particular, our refusal to point the finger at wealth hoarders, specuvestors, and pretending the problem lies all elsewhere.

... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Boraxman wrote to Dream Master <=-

Dream Master wrote to Gamgee <=-

@MSGID: <60228F74.1178.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <6020B19F.3933.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Gamgee to Dumas Walker on
Sun Feb 07 2021 09:01 pm

Nowadays the Dem's goal is to have everybody equally poor and miserable. Except the "ruling class elite", of course.

I believe what you are saying is a poor mischaracterization of the Democrat Party goal. Why can't we level the playing field? Why can't
we bring up the poor and bring down the rich? Why should multi-millionaires command more authority in this country than that of
the lower to middle class? How much money is too much, how little
money is too little? Leveling the playing field allows all of us to
have a say in our government process, a say in how we live, and a say
in how we ensure everyone is protected.

We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech
in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them
terrorists.

Their party goal is clearly, judging from their actions, the
maintenance of a liberal world order and the reign of a elite
consisting of those already rich and powerful.

When I judge a political party, I don't look at what they put on the label, but rather the contents of the bottle, which is usually
something completely different.

Problem is, you pretty obviously only see what you want to see.


... That's just incredible! As in... it's just not credible.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ VAGUE BBS - Vague.ddns.net - Telnet:23/SSH:22/RLogin:513

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Dream Master on Tue Feb 09 2021 11:06 pm

We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.

Where is the world going? It isn't going the route of fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processes, traditional data centers, to name a few. Big Tech, I believe, is a mischaracterisation of modern business practices. Changing the way we do (things, processes, methods) is the only way to advance in the world. Continuing our focus on traditional models is only going to hurt and not help us.


Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Tracker1 wrote to Dr. What <=-

I'm not suggesting price controls, only constraints that ensure some
level of licensure and competition.

"Constraints" = "Price controls"

Oh, you mean like lack of patents on software prevented software from being written?

Software is covered under copyright.


... New religion? I haven't used up the old one, yet!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dumas Walker wrote to GAMGEE <=-

Exactly. They would rather take the middle class down than raise the
poor up. Probably because it is easier.

Especially for Lefties. They are completely unable to create. They only
know how to destroy.


... Professionals built the Titanic, amateurs built the ark.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dream Master to Boraxman on Wed Feb 10 2021 07:35 am

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Dream Master on Tue Feb 09 2021 11:06 pm

We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.

Where is the world going? It isn't going the route of fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processes, traditional data centers, to name a few. Big Tech, believe, is a mischaracterisation of modern business practices. Changing th way we do (things, processes, methods) is the only way to advance in the wor Continuing our focus on traditional models is only going to hurt and not hel us.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

I fail to see how such declaration is related to Boraxman's.

If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Dr. What to Tracker1 on Wed Feb 10 2021 08:48 am

Oh, you mean like lack of patents on software prevented software from being written?

Software is covered under copyright.

Things that are important enough don't get patented. When you patent some industrial property you have to disclose information about it, and you usually don't want to do that if the property in question is really groundbreaking.

What you do is to develop $thing.

Then you rent $thing or offer the services of $thing without disclosing how it works (or often, that you even have it).

This is how many powerful industrial sectors have been operating, including electric power generation. A lot of hardware in certain powerplants is not the property of the powerplant, but it is leased, and nobody but the leaser knows how it works inside.

With software, we are going to get the same thing. Instead of having an office program in your computer, you will be renting it and running it from some cloud system, and only the service operator will have a copy of the software or know how it works.

I don't think copyright or patent laws matter *that much* when it comes to industrial applications, but lacking a semblance of them would put more tech development in the underground.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Arelor to Dream Master on Wed Feb 10 2021 01:16 pm

If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.

Times are changing and we need to move with it. If we keep putting up walls around progress we will be left behind.

Brian Klauss <-> Dream Master
Caught in a Dream | caughtinadream.com a Synchronet BBS

---
■ Synchronet ■ Caught in a Dream - caughtinadream.com

Dream Master wrote to Boraxman <=-

@MSGID: <6023EF41.1224.dove-debate@caughtinadream.com>
@REPLY: <60232C2A.20313.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Re: Re: move to Canada they s
By: Boraxman to Dream Master on
Tue Feb 09 2021 11:06 pm

We can do that. It's just the Dems aren't. They are putting Big Tech in power, the captain of industry, the (powerful) identity politics groups. They demonise the working Trump voters and call them terrorists.

Where is the world going? It isn't going the route of fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processes, traditional data centers, to name a
few. Big Tech, I believe, is a mischaracterisation of modern business practices. Changing the way we do (things, processes, methods) is the only way to advance in the world. Continuing our focus on traditional models is only going to hurt and not help us.

The world will change, but what you can't do is presume to know what that change should be. That is what our "ruling elite" do, they pronounce things like the "Great Reset", say it's just how things are going to be, and we end up being conned into accepting a future of their chosing, not one of ours.

The problem I have with "Big Tech", or modern business practices, is that people are presuming to know what is right or wrong, what should be done. Business push Social Justice, social change, denounce this or that, but how do they know how this will all end up? They don't. No one actually know what values we need, what should be considered good or bad, right or wrong. We can only do this by trial and error, through making small changes, corrections and evaluations. But what Liberalism does, is it just proclaims things like "The nation state is obsolete" or "the future is a gig economy" but has no idea how this will end up.

Traditionalism is actually not about stagnation, but in not presuming that individual human beings can unlaterally dictate successfully a new culture, or morals. We learn through trial and error, through experience.

The alliance I talked about is seeking to limit anyone that questions them, to denouce any other worldviews as "evil", as if somehow they have prognosticated into the future what would happen if we did actually have a populist leader of an establishment one.


... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

Arelor wrote to Dr. What <=-

What you do is to develop $thing.

Then you rent $thing or offer the services of $thing without disclosing how it works (or often, that you even have it).

This is how many powerful industrial sectors have been operating, including electric power generation. A lot of hardware in certain powerplants is not the property of the powerplant, but it is leased,
and nobody but the leaser knows how it works inside.

The risk with that is that if someone on the inside leaks the information,
you have no legal recourse when another company uses that information
in their own products. You can go after the leaker, of course, if you can
find him.

With software, we are going to get the same thing. Instead of having an office program in your computer, you will be renting it and running it from some cloud system, and only the service operator will have a copy
of the software or know how it works.

Software was always an interesting thing in this area.

I don't think copyright or patent laws matter *that much* when it comes
to industrial applications, but lacking a semblance of them would put
more tech development in the underground.

Right. And that hits on the reason for copyright/patents: If they didn't exist many people simply wouldn't release their inventions - or wouldn't make
them in the first place.

With copyright/patents, people can create, release the information, but maintain control of that information for a period of time - for their benefit. But after the time limit is up, the information can be used by anyone
to build off of - and create something even better.

One of the problems is that copyright lasts **way** too long (Thanks Disney). But that's another topic.


... Honesty pays, but not enough for some.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Arelor wrote to Dream Master <=-

If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent
stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.

That's why Lefties are always so angry: Reality refuses to go along with
their false Narrative.


... Life is a game. Money is how we keep score.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Dr. What wrote to Arelor <=-

@VIA: VERT/DMINE
@MSGID: <6026ABA7.42968.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <6024311B.4058.dove-debate@palantirbbs.ddns.net>

Arelor wrote to Dream Master <=-

If you think giving power to Amazon and Facebook while independent
stores and websites shrink is the way to go and abbandon fossil fuels, legacy manufacturing processers and traditional data centers, I suspect you are setting yourself up for a hard disappointment.

That's why Lefties are always so angry: Reality refuses to go along
with their false Narrative.

"Lefties"... yeah, whoever that is.

What's the weather like out there on Fantasy Island?


... Your inability to understand something is not a valid argument against it. --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ VAGUE BBS - Vague.ddns.net - Telnet:23/SSH:22/RLogin:513