How does a government facilitate comprehensive care for its constituents without sacrificing equity?

In what way does a government facilitate comprehensive care for its people? We should get rid of private healthcare companies and go to a national, state paid healthcare plan. Being a cancer patient, I have had to deal with the financial problems that plague someone who cant work but still needs treatment. The only true way to be able to cover everyone equally is to have 1 health plan that is beneficial to the patient. Everyone always asks where the funds will come from to pay for this healthcare plan, well I for one think we should cut defense and put that into either healthcare or education. We should also remove NAFTA and the money that the import taxes generate could pay for it also. The problem with healthcare companies is they are out to make money, not provide a service. I don’t agree with the Government telling Doctors who gets treatment and when if its on their dime, but the Socialized health-care of Canada seems to work very well. I have talked to many different Canadian cancer survivors who tell me they are debt free and it was a pretty painless process. How can the United States not have such a good healthcare system? Everyone always talks about how bad Socialism is before they truly understand the benefit of a Socialized healthcare system. I dont want anyone to ever get cancer, but if they could see in my eyes how hard it is to navigate the complicated healthcare process when doing treatment and the thousands of dollars of bills that accrue…they may see it differently.

What is the process to develop an economic policy that provides services and sustainability?

Sustainability, that is the goal of any nation to keep their people happy, their deficit low and their jobs high. The United States was, at one point, a huge industrial country. We produced almost everything we used, and very little was imported from other countries. Now, we are a nation of services and those production jobs have long since moved to Mexico or China. This is not good for economic sustainability, and can only lead to disaster later on down the road. We also have an abundance of natural resources that are being wasted.  Sustainability is not done by using the resources you have to no end, and not developing new ones that are better. One major resource we have is people, there are a lot of people in  the United States and a ton of great knowledge is wasted on meaningless tasks. Being a Socialist, I feel that Sustainability and Services that benefit the greater good are ideal for any country, rather than developing a sense of wealth from products, we should learn to better help each other. If we do not act soon, our children will inherit a lifeless planet devoid of any type of resource. Do you feel that more money should be spent on finding new resources than on other things? I also feel we should spend more money on education. It is no secret that the United States is falling behind the other developed nations of the world in Education. If we had an educational system that helped students grow and learn, rather than based around profits, I feel we would explore new possibilities of human growth than ever dreamed of.

Nation-State policy.

Nation state policy is a very delicate matter. How should a nation state adopt its policies? I for one feel that a nation state should adopt its policies based off its ideologies. It should benefit its citizens first, and it should be run by the people. I am an avid socialist, and I feel that Capitalism is the worst possible way it can benefit the citizens who run the country. The country should make it hard for anyone to come in and change the country to suit others needs. Religion shouldn’t be allowed in the country, as it clogs logical thinking with the unknown. Countries that do not work for the people will soon find themselves falling behind the rest of the world. Nation states should be ran by the people with their best interests at heart. The citizens should develop the policy and enact them. Politicians shouldn’t be paid, but be rewarded in other ways for their dedication to the country.

What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

Judges and the Judicial System play a small role in supporting freedom. In a sense, they actually enforce laws and decide what punishments to administer when a person commits a crime. The Judicial system limits freedom by just being the judicial system. The system regulates laws, and when needed interferes with day to day living of citizens in the United States. On the other side, without laws the United States would be a hard place to live in. Crime would run rampant, and society would revert back to the old ways of every man for himself. Total Freedom is the ability to do whatever you want, but as we all know in our society that is far from the truth. Do you think you are completely free? I don’t, as there are laws and rules to abide by from day to day. Judges have to also follow these rules, and they enforce them with swift justice. On a positive note, Judges and the Judicial system prevent people from running around doing whatever they please, and in a sense protects others freedom by preventing freedom. If you think about it, if person A wanted to steal person B’s wallet…without the Judicial system there would be no laws against this.

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

Congress can support and limit authentic representation in many different ways. I feel that they limit the Representation of the people, because they are truly not in tune with the rest of the country. They are rich senior citizens, and their ideologies are a thing of the past. What they view as important does not always go in tune with the rest of the country.  True authentic representation would mean that every person voice their opinion’s and idea’s on legislature that will most likely effect them. They can also support authentic representation, by being a true representative of their state. Citizens elect these officials to go forth with their best interest at heart, does that always happen? Probably not…but it is at least attempted. The two party system we have is, itself, not Democratic in the least. Congress is split into the Democrats and Republicans, and each side has its own agenda. It feels as if we are not united at all, but split by our respective political party. Why not split the country into two sides? The Democrats can have their own, and the Republicans can have their own side.

In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy?

The president supports and limits the formation of an ideal democracy in many ways. I feel that the United States Government has shifted from a Democracy, to a Republic. In a Republic, the Government is split into two categories. Theres the Leader, or the President, who makes decisions and oversee’s his Empires rule. The other part to the Republic is the Senate, which is a collective form of the people…just without the People’s best interest at heart. The President can Veto anything he see’s unfit for use in the Government or the Peoples interest. He can also propose legislature that has many different affects on the Nation itself. The way he limits the formation is his power. In my opinion he is too powerful to actually be called The President. He represents our nation to other nations, and is treated like the King of the United States. The only difference is our King rotates every 8 years, and sometimes every 4. Do you think the President has too much power? We also only have two Political sides that represent the majority of the people, the Democrats and Republics. In a true Democracy there are multiple sides and each side has an equal share. I feel the President should not pick a side, but be unified for all to help make the country a better place.

How do individuals and groups of people influence the political process?

This question has been raised time and time again, and there are many difference thoughts behind whether or not individuals or groups of people influence the political process more. I feel that groups of people influence the political process more than just individuals. Yeah, Individuals with enough power and money can make a huge difference in the political process but mainly groups make the biggest impact. Look at groups like FEMA or Unions, they make huge impacts on political processes in the states they partake in.  Recently a Governor was quoted at trying his best to remove unions from his particular state, but Unions have such a hold they influence easily what will happen. I feel that he wont be in power much longer. Do you think groups like Unions have too much power? Some would say yes, but other would say no. I feel they have too much sway in businesses, but thats another discussion. Individuals may have large sway in the process by having power and money. Those two qualities seem to help someone get what they needed passed quicker than anything else. Also, past Political entities such as Presidents or former Congressmen have the power to influence people by their presence alone. If Former President Clinton want’s to oppose a bill or law, it seems like he could call in a favor and have it opposed. It pays to have friends and old connections in the government, and we will see in time how much it pays off.

In what ways does public opinion influence the formation of a democratic society?

In what way does public opinion influence the formation of a democratic society? Well, there are many different ways that public opinion influences the way the government is created. When our forefathers were setting out a new government in lieu of the revolution from England, they had the public opinion of how a Government for the people actually worked. Back then we only had 13 colonies and a few thousand people to worry about. Representatives from each Colony were actual people from the land, and not paid for their services. Now a days, we actually hold elections for our Representatives and they decide what to do about their individual state. I feel that Public opinion can change certain things, such as Immigration and Abortion. Ultimately the person who decides is the people in office and how they decide is what we have to live by. The way I feel may not be the way someone else feels and so forth, so getting the full public opinion is quite hard. Would it be easier if we elected someone to carry our message once a year? It would most definitely be interesting to see if that person could communicate fully the ideals of who they represent, better than we have now. Public Opinion also has a big impact on what the Government spends its money on, ideally, in an actual Democracy it does. I don’t particularly think we should spend as much on Defense as we do…but someone else may disagree with me and think the Defense budget should be increased.

How does the Private Sector and Government interact?

The private sector and the Government interact in many different ways. The private sector has to abide by laws and rules set forth by the Government. These laws and rules are in place to prevent Corporations from taking advantage of the working man. Many years ago, people were made to work in harsh and horrible conditions for little pay for long hours. We now have regulations provided to prevent such things from happening. I feel the Government should interact more with the Private sector, like keeping top Executives from taking bonuses while their companies go into debt and eventually need to be helped by the government anyway. The Private sector interacts with the government by supplying it with commodities. All their cars, computers, guns etc are made in the private sector and purchased by the Government using Tax money. What would happen if the Government opened its own car company, or gun manufacturer? It would be quite interesting to see if that would happen and the outcome of such an event. The private sector also funds the Government, through Taxes and other means. Everything and everyone is taxed, and usually businesses pay more in taxes because they make more money. This in turn helps the Government keep the infrastructural working as it should. According to the Federal Bureau of Labor, Government jobs pay more than Private sector jobs.

What role does power play in government, economy, and politics?

There are a ton of ways to prove how power plays a HUGE Role in government, and many are blatently obvious. Look at President Obama’s Healthcare reform stuff for example…He has a ton of power being the President of the United States, but because we have checks and balances he does not control everything. The other two major arms of the government help keep the balance, and one of them is controlled by the opposite party of President Obama. Insurance Company lobbyists try very hard to remove the laws that were put in place by his cabinet, and many will be removed. That is just one way that Power plays a role in Government.

In the Economy, on other hand, Power is with those who have money. When the big company bailouts of 2008 happened, I was angered to see companies and banks so desperately needing help from the government and not willing to fix their bad management policies. The CEO’s still had their bonuses paid out, and their trips paid all by tax payer money but the poor guy downstairs who just got laid off by the huge banks is now out of a job. The economy is controlled by the system we call the “market.” Certain products have value and other lose their value. Those who stay in power, adapt to the every changing need.

Politics ties into the Government. Power is had by those who have the majority of seats in either the House or the Senate. Many times, senators and congressmen are given luxuries by Lobbyists trying to change a certain law, or appeal something they do not want. Money plays a HUGE part in it also.