Comments by "Aaron Okeanos" (@AaronOkeanos) on "David Pakman Show"
channel.
-
315
-
304
-
171
-
162
-
101
-
97
-
92
-
88
-
85
-
84
-
83
-
81
-
79
-
79
-
78
-
76
-
76
-
75
-
62
-
59
-
59
-
58
-
52
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
48
-
48
-
45
-
44
-
42
-
40
-
40
-
38
-
38
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Don't underestimate the opportunity. For Chinese People "face" and money are two of the most important topics. And the absence of the US because of the Uguire-topics, the lack of Human Rights, Democratical Principals, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Press and the Rule of Law would be major embarassement maybe even insult for the CCP in view of the hole world.
They will distort the olympics to a major propaganda event for the Chinese Government that is absolutely sure. To show the world how "advanced" how "good" they are. The Chinese Government is paying billions every year in Softpower measures around the globe to actively influence the worlds opinion about the Chinese Government (they will say about China, but this is only about the government not the people). And they will place their glory and prestige AND power over the intent and spirit of this event. In a way they even corrupt the purpose of this event: Peaceful, equal, open and fair competition.
[Open (T...wan?), Fair competition? (IP Theft, Destruction of the Biosphere for Profit, Exploitation of humans and nature for profit) Don't make me laught.]
The more I think about it, the more the world has the duty to not take part not with diplomats and not with athlets.
Western Democracies would like to continue to trade and cooperate with China but only under one condition: That China starts following the rules the rest of the world operates under and stop cheating for profit. At least Human Rights, the Uigure-issue and the Rule of Law should be uphold. Asking for Democracy might be too much at this point. It might be good for the Chinese People but never for the Chinese Government as it would end their grip on the people.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Maybe you should re-read how Hitler get into power in the 1930'ties. There are some similarities and noone could ever imagine before what would happen later.
If you want advice. Start to see Trump as a child and treat him like that. Noone really recognises this but most of his popularity comes from exactly this without people noticing or only unconciously. Ask geriatic experts (experts for old people) they will confirm you that old people mentally start turning into children at some point and the best way is to start treating them like that again. It turns out they even like it. That's why Trump admires strong-arm/authoritarian political figures like Putin, Erdogan like some fathers would be to his kids. However the danger is if you treat someone like that as an adult or if you give him to much power. Now add one element to it: Trump is a spoiled brat, pampered all his life. What happens when you have a child like that?
The funny thing is, the evidence is right before us, the way he speaks, thinks, deals with rivals, deal with friends, ex-friends and experts telling him what to do and like he deals with problems is exactly that of a child. Look closer and you will find the child in all of it. Hitler was also a child but was not recognised or treated as such with devestating results. You should ask youself do you want the most powerful man in America, maybe even in the world, who is actually a child, having so much power without any feeling for responsibility?
And there is another danger. This mental condition makes him prone to outside manipulation especially from people in his personal surroundings. I especially think about e.g. Kushner here a psychopath if I have ever seen one but I bet there is a long line of people trying to manipulate him in their favor.
If I were Biden I would strongly react to Trump. Confront him. Try to intimidate him. Acting like a adult would with a naughty child. This would not only help with Trump, but also with his supporters because they suffer from a similar problem being childs needing strong leadership and a direction. They think Trump is this, but don't recognize that he turned into a kid already. Their subconcious have recognized this that's why he gets extra sympathy because their subconcious tells them "he is just a kid". A deadly combination (political speaking).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yeboscrebo4451 And there it is again. You keep repeating the same misleading comparison.
Your number/comparson is completly void of meaning because it compares the percentages of total tax revenue and not the tax each person has to pay from his income.
I give you an example how ridiculous your point is:
Imagine a country with just 2 citizen:
Imagine Citizen A has 100,000,000$ income and a tax rate of 1% paying 1 mio in tax.
Imagine Citizen B has 100,000$ income and 10% in tax rate paying 10,000$ in tax.
The total tax income would be 1,010,000$
The "lower bottom" 50% would be 0,9% of this and 99,1% would be the top 1% in this. This is what you are throwing at me all this time.
The tax-rate of the low-wage earner would still be 10 times higher than for the rich guy although the rich guy earns 1,000 times more than the other.
Meaning the poor guy has to give up 0,10$ from each dollar he earns while the rich guy only has to give up 0,01$ per dollar earned.
And that considering that the rich has no issues paying the same tax rate or even a 90% tax rate would not have any impact on his life and still earn 111 times more than the other after taxes. He would just get richer a little slower.
This is the unfairness. The same unfairness which exists in the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There are advanced countries, who are like the US also democracies have the rule of law, etc. but have no juries. In Europe in particular. They have judges, lawyers, witnesses, etc. and all the procedures ... but no juries, no jury duty and so on.
It changes a lot and lays much more weight on the judge and on the arguments and substance of the lawyers. Less social hacking, less manipulation, less biasness by selection, less gaslighting since judges can see through them much easier.
However it also makes the judges role and ability much more important ... and I'm not sure American Judges who are often political appointees and not always selected for their abilities, experience and objectivity would be a good idea to be implemented in the US since it gives potentially corrupt judges even more power.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You just need to name "Defund the police" to show how terrible Democrats are. A 3-word slogan which need 3 paragraphs and a "but" to not be misunderstood. Ridiculous stupid decission it should never have been used.
Republicans are very good at campaigning with more or less nothing. They either have no policies to work with or their policies are so terrible that everyone actually reading it will vote against it.
Republicans also never talk about the past and about their achievements because there is nothing or it's so bad that it's better to not talk about it anymore. Nerver noticed, but Republicans always talk about tomorrow, they promise the world for you and the pot of gold is always behind the next hill at the end of the rainbow. But they never deliver it's a lie, an illusion.
Republians also like to campaign on fear and anger. It's their most successfull strategy for elections. Make an enemy (trans, culture war, woke people) or exaggerate an existing enemy or prejudice (immigrants, "metropolitan elite", The Swamp, socialists/communists) and promise "to deal with it" and to protect voters from it. Do they ever? No ... or lets say they make it appear like that. Solving it means you cannot use it for the next election.
Despite all those negatives and more or less nothing substantive (and real/truthful) to campaign on Republicans manage to get elected quite successfully by appealing to emotions, especially anger, hate and fear. They have a short direct language mostly short 3 word slogans people can remember and use even if they might not fully grasp the meaning. And the Democrats could learn a lesson or two.
And this is the what Democrats need to change. Appeal to emotions. People like hope, passion, empathy more than hate, anger and fear. Point out achievements people liked or even loved. Keep reminding them of the good stuff. And use the policies you plan to introduce to work for you most of the policies the left suggested are liked even by Right-Wing voters.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What Trump and in extension Maga showed is that the current system of politics is no longer fit for purpose and desperatly needs reforms.
The honor-system no longer works in the executive, legislature and even the judiciary. The system simply cannot handle the destructive lack of scrutiny, transparency, accountability, integrity, decency and honesty.
Trump showed the cracks and deficiencies lingering under the surface for at least 40 years if not even longer. It is now up to us to fix it, make it more robust, fair, free, open, transparent.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The simple difference between Facts (which News should be alone) and Opinion is not known to most. They don't know there is a fine but extremly important difference.
1) One is fact or reality what happened or what is - the truth for a better word - and there is only one version of it all other variations are misinformation or lies if you prefer. Informations which are not truthful or also contain "views" (see next paragraph) which were either keept secret, changed or only partial given or worse completly made up. THIS IS FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. Getting the full, unchanged, honest information without changes, additions or omissions.
2) The other is a view on those facts, an interpretation, an opinion on those facts and how to proceed from there, what to do next, how to react to it or an evaluation how bad/good this is. There is only one version of facts out there, but everyone of us can have his or her own view on this or even multiple views. And linked to this is FREEDOM OF OPINION. That noone can force their opinion on you. FREEDOM OF SPEECH. also guarantees you that you can say your opinion without getting punishment for it. But this is NOT giving you the rigth to lie or manipulate about the facts (see first paragraph).
What's important here is: If you disagree with the opinion of someone else, it's a disagreement, not a lie. And since everyone is free to have his or her own opinion you can only try to argue/convince them otherwise. But lying has nothing to do with it (unless the person actually lies about the facts).
And channels like Fox or Newsmax who call themselves "News"-Channels are actually Opinion-Channels. And they don't want you to know this fine difference. They want you to think both is the same and with that ... that the facts have different versions which is never the case. And to make you attack everyone who disagrees with your opinion by making you feel attacked on the facts. They want to have THEIR version of the facts ... so you get an opinion/view to THEIR liking. This is the great manipulation.
And why do we know this? Well because channels like Fox have argued before courts with this excuse. They actually admitting before a judge, that they are only giving opinions (#2) not facts (#1) ... but they call it "News". Legally this get them off any kind of repercussions because well Freedom of Opinion.
See how this connects now. If people don't see the difference the "News"-channels and people like Tucker Carlson got away scot free because they tell you their opinion (#2) and you think it's facts (#1).
Another problem is: There are a lot of rights for opinions (#2) but there are no strong protections for facts/the truth (#1). There is no punishment for lying (besides lying to courts), there is not even a right for truth. The only point when courts make a ruling on this is when someone has a financial damage from a lie, or another disadvantage or any of the other rights is hurt. But the truth has very little protection. And I think it desperatly needs some.
My suggestion is introduce a new human right: The Right for Truth
Giving all people a right to know the truth and make all people responsible for the lies they tell if they lie (because they hurt the rights of other people). And with the status as human right, it can limit and override the Freedom of Speech meaning you can have any opinion you want, but you have no right to lie to others. If you do you are fully responsible for the consequences.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What you call "Deepstate" is the American Oligarchy. It exists indeed for at least 40 years maybe even longer reaching back into the 19th century and the time of the first US millionairs. It consists of a group of Oligarchs, these are extremly wealthy, extremly good connected individuals from the billionaires in the US.
It's not really a secret there are even books from reputable authors about it not sounding like an insane conspiracy believer. But they sure tried to stay in the background influencing the country by donations, good connections and favors and by sending selected personell into politics to both sides actually. People like Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers are assumed to be part of it. Maybe you should ask Joe Manchin about this or Mitch McConnel both have the same employer.
However the Republicans are their house-party. They always pushed them, helped them with money, connections and influence. However as you see by Hillary Clinton, Munchin and others the Democrats are not totally outside of their reach as well.
Ask yourself: What is the most reliable way of ensuring nothing gets passed you don't like?
Answer: By controlling both sides of the Isle. Now who is against 15$ minimum wage, Infrastructure, HR1, tax increases for the wealthy, Wealth Tax (!!!)? Who makes problems with environmental legislation, Green New Deal, more regulation, more worker rights, basically everything which costs employers more money or limits their ways?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bryaneverett9850 It doesn't have to be. Sorry you not coinvinced me. I don't see any reason why the same reward/punishment system of private companies cannot be applied to national companies.
And I don't suggest to nationalize all, only the core services of society which by extension are always problematic because they are by necessacity not always profitable and the profit-motive also have impact on the quality of service and reliability: Water, Power, Local Transport, Waste-Disposal, Mail, Communication, Education, Healthcare, Childcare, Elderly Care, Housing (partial)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1