that is the funniest red herring like distraction you have ever posted. the point of this conversation was your view of gerrymandering being the diabolical work of the republicans seems to be wrong. Instead of addressing that subject you went off on a tangent to change the subject. By the way you admitted the shareholders of the Federal Reserve Banks are private banks and not the federal govt. So for anyone who has the slightest understanding of corporate structure and property rights - we proved you agree the Federal Reserve System is privately owned.
Did you notice that all of your links are to lunatic organizations? This is advice i am happy to give you and Jem both, and for no charge. You can thank me later. If you follow this advice it can save you a great deal of embarrassment as you go through life.. The advice is: Whenever you read, or hear, something that does not make sense, or is not logical, assume it is probably not correct. Then if it is important to you, spend some time to check out the details. You will find in virtually 100 percent of these instances, what you read was politically slanted, intentionally misleading, intentional misinformation, misquoted, or important details were accidentally, or intentionally left out. Trust your brain and your common sense. So for your benefit: (I did the legwork this time, next time you do it.) "Information about anyone who does not decline registration will be electronically transmitted from the DMV to the secretary of state’s office, where citizenship will be verified and names will be added to the voter rolls." see for example: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-me-pol-ca-motor-voter-law-20151016-html-htmlstory.html And numerous other legitimate reference sites regarding California law.
I agree with much of that. America has always been conservative. It's never had a socialist/communist bent like Europe and Germany, going back nearly 200 years. While the ideas Bernie proposes are old to the world, they are new to America. That's no surprise. Do you honestly think the most capitalistic, meritocratic country in the world is just by coincidence, also the richest and most powerful? The two go hand-in-hand, many Americans recognize that, and will actively resist socialism at every level. On the otherhand, obviously at least 1/4'er of America is ready for Socialism along the lines Bernie suggests and are active politically.
As long as you will keep an open mind we can have a useful dialog. We should be asking the question whether being the richest and most powerful is something we should necessarily be proud of, and whether there are other thing much more important. Secondly, we should define what is meant by richest. I think "most powerful" is pretty clear. It means in a military sense or in a financial sense, or both. Many of these "most" type things, but certainly not all of them, have to be expressed as per capita to make any sense.
For the love of God, please admit to yourself that America is already socialist. So is every country in the world. The only two major things left forAmerica to adopt is tax dollars going to free education and universal health care. Otherwise we've been socialist for at least 3/4 of a century.
I've given much thought to that and made several conclusions. Yes, it's paramount America retains it's status as the worlds economic and military leader. Richest, on a per capita basis, is sort of irrelevant because oil-fiefdoms and capitalistic enclaves like Singapore and Hong Kong look like superpowers on paper. When in reality, their economies are tiny, relatively speaking. Now I would also counter to you, that nearly the entire education system is dominated by Liberal educators, making it an echo-chamber for left-wing thought. Like every highschool kid and university graduate, I was indoctrinated into socialism by my educators. It took me many years and posting on this site, to undo my brainwashing. Now you're a guy who's obviously highly intelligent and from what I hear, involved in academia. It's no surprise to me your views are of the entrenched left-wing variety. So we both have our biases we bring to the table. But I know exactly where you're coming from. I was raised in Canada, went to Canadian schools, Canadian university. I know the schpeil. Lets discuss if you like
Shades of grey? Every country, by that narrow definition, qualifies as "socialist". Ancient Rome or Egypt were 'socialist' because they levied taxes to provide for the common defense, and staff government/administrators and public utilities, like roads. Know what I mean? I think the point here is just because America does have some socialist welfare programs in existence now, doesn't mean we should socialize the entire system because we already are (sort of) 'socialist'. It's illogical.
talk about open minds... 1. so the bloomberg article about gerrymandering being good for the democrats because of clumping is nonsense according to you? Good open mind there Piezoe. 2. and here is a quote of yours... when speaking of the Federal Reserve System... you stated... http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index.php?threads/the-bern-identity.297236/page-15 Of course I can tell you who owns the shares, it is right on each Branch Banks website. It is a required condition of joining the Federal reserve system. All the banks that are regulated through each regional bank own shares. It is a requirement. It is not optional. Don't be silly.. I've had enough of your conspiracy nonsense. 2.1 So from your own quote we see the Federal Reserve banks are owned by shareholders. Those shareholders are private banks... not govt shareholders. You now must conclude the banks are owned by private shareholders not the govt. Either that or you are in full cognitive dissonance. 2.2 before you come back and assert some bullshit about the bank like you always... do... please provide a link to support your bullshit. You saying the Federal Reserve banks are not privately owned... does not make it so.