Fri, Jul 11, 2014, 2:25 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 1 hr 35 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Xinyuan Real Estate Co., Ltd. Message Board

  • walrathcrai walrathcrai Nov 20, 2012 12:26 AM Flag

    Ok Chris

    Chris, you say that since WWII truth, justice, democracy and the American way have florished. I say there is NO democracy anywhere in the world and that the rich dominate everything. It's true they didn't get their boy in against Obama. But if you think Obama isn't also a tool of the rich you're mistaken. Obama is a conservative and the Republican party is Fascist. That's our choice. And it's like that in every industrialized country.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You respond to 90% of EVERYONES posts! Who are you trying to kid pal??!

    • Wal,
      How stupid can you be!! Absolutely amazing!! Obama a conservative? Let me educate you, obama is a communist. He knows nothing about the foundation of this great nation. It would be interesting to test him on the constitution.

      Wal, you are dumber than spit and part of the reason this great nation is in so much danger. But, the intelligent people will prevail. You can thank me later!

    • "The pressure is unbearable!! What shall I do??"

      Call him coward! If Don said he was homosexual would you call?

    • I like the stuff you're thinking about here, Craig. I'm going to rip off your 'conservative' and 'fascist' label ideas for a separate thread on the political spectrum.

      Why do you think there's no democracy anywhere in the world?

      Most countries, including our own, aren't perfect democracies -- the electoral college is exhibit A -- but western countries do tend to adhere to the sacred principle of "One Man, One Vote" ("Man" meaning mankind, men and women; I use the old fashioned formula because that's how Thomas Jefferson always said it and he's one of my heroes).

      Since we can all vote, is your objection more to the fact that big money tends to win elections?

      I'm critical of that aspect of western politics, as well. But I believe that's handled better in other western countries than here, and I also believe we can fix the system.

      Here's a couple ideas: How about outlawing PAC's and SuperPAC's altogether (the Supreme Court's "Citizens United" decision was a step in the wrong direction), limiting individual contributions to a low amount -- $2000, maybe -- and offering publicly financed money to the nominees of both major parties for every race?

      I don't know how much the publicly financed money would be, but I'd want it big enough that any challenger could run a decent race on the public money alone What would you think of maybe $500 million for Presidential nominees, $25 million baseline for US Senate candidates, adjusted up or down based on the populations of the state, and $5 or $10 million for Congressional elections?

      We could even extend the public financing to 3rd parties, but they'd need to hit some percentage numbers in elections first.

      • 1 Reply to hmmm26
      • Chris, I'll give you a tentative thumbs up because your heart is in the right place. Karl Marx once said that every 4 years 2 bourgeoise candidates run and the bourgeois candidate wins. Not much has changed. The fact is you can not have democracy in a capitalist system. Corporations are dictatorships. Every so often through their ineptitude they manage to bring about an imminent collapse which the government has to bail us out of. The rest of the time the government is told to mind its own business.
        A true democracy would nationalize the banking system, the healthcare industry and the utilities. Political parties would be able to run a certain number of free adds. The rest could be paid for at reduced rates with public financing. The supreme court ruling that money is free speech would be overturned.

 
XIN
3.92-0.030(-0.76%)2:20 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.