Once again the US has proven that it does not like Communism. I believed that in the WHO that there are some that have traced the swine flu and bird flu back to Communist China (belief). This would have been done to implement a root preemptive strike for a major communist economic theory to an industry. This industry is based on the insurance industry. Which in the US and free markets and other markets is a luxury, not a necessity. As a necessity is medicare or a health program that keeps you alive and able to live. Insurance full Cadillac programs, is not. (however, the discrimination of human beings in the insurance industry is a necessary civil rights matter, yet I speak only of economic theory and not of civil rights). Thus as the Democrats have played for the last 3 Presidential candidates to communize the insurance industry through SOE's it would be easy for a communist intelligences agency to try and create a preemptive strike to show a national security for every US citizen to have forced health insurance at an above poverty level necessity
Thus, the Democratic Party voted against the use of SOE's to dominate an industry. The Republican party just hated the whole idea because of their hard core values of taxes. In which instead of going the way of regulation via legislation like a an article that would have worked by regulating, non discrimination. Which would have raised the actual pin point target to a t for those who need it. They went very vague and broad and just tried to force everyone. Even though a proper pin point non discrimination would have been the best route and the Republicans could not have said a word because it is a Section 7 Civil rights matter, that needs to be dealt with.
This insurance regulation based on Title 7 would have allowed the necessary need for those who need insurance to obtain it when they need it. As the Insurance industry has business that take home after all is done profits in the billions, this would not have been a problem. The idea that major Democratic leaders still try and use the elementary idea of politics in given somebody something on someone elses back is not US normative policy. At a poverty level, with a non discrimination clause those in need are taken care of. In which it allows those above poverty to be free in their choice.
This idea of freedom of choice and freedom of economics is a normative policy in the US. No matter how much anyone tries term after term politicians on both sides vote down the idea of communized industries. The idea that a luxury program (again not saying the non discrimination part) would be forced upon people before a proper necessity of housing, food, or even military service is not US normative policy. Therefore, It would not make sense to allow in the Communist SOE's to take over industries via supply and demand curve erosion, on other free enterprise market shares, so as to force later in time a proliferation of SOE's just to compete with the SOE's in the US.
This type of Communist SOE allowance is not normative US policy. We have gone to complete nuclear holocaust stand off based on SOE' economics and the idea that the individual should be forced to work for others. We have went to full, scale military defenses of our allies Korea and Vietnam due to countries with this type of economic policy. The US has basically been able to be the bright star of this world not based on above poverty level SOE market share holding. But because of spread out business wealth via individual close to perfect competitive markets.
These competitive markets have allowed the US to be one of the world's best spread of wealth with the most civil rights based on labor ownership for the US citizen to chose what they want to do. As there is no comparison with countries with full scale communized industries which force their people to pay above 50% of their labors to the community. You can't compare US normative policy of individualism and economic freedom via competitive markets and not forced communized markets and communized markets that force their people to pay half of their labors to the community. There is no comparison.
As such the US policy again holds that Communized industries in the US are not US normative policies. As such any allowance of massive foreign Communist SOE's literally in the US is against US normative policy. If you compare US domestic policy on their own allowance of economic civil rights compared to the allowance of foreign Communist entities like Sovereign Wealth Funds and SOE markets that crush competitive markets with their heavy centralizing of wealth in which is then used to control and conquer.
It is one thing for Texas of Alaska that have SOE's that create Sovereign Wealth funds to control and conquer via investments. In which the market price could be cheaper for the citizen if there was more competition. Thus placing the citizens money back in their pockets instead of the rich leading class and how they wish to spend our money and taxes, for control and conquer. The normative policy of the US economics would show that SOE's and the centralization of wealth is not US economic policy. US economic policy is to have more spread out competition, and fair market places; rather than centralized entities that hoard value then use it how they feel necessary for control and conquer of the market places.
Historically, the US has had small centralization of wealth. In which wealth was spread out via military bases. This military base spread out in the US allowed for less guerrilla warfare. However, today in a world of allowance of Communist domination in the international global community we see a detrimental affect to this mindset.
This mindset of anti-US normative economic policies has left the US very vulnerable. Where the US used to have bases in Panama canal we saw US citizens being used as economic warfare agents of the Communist to get the US to disband their bases their so that the Communist could create bases there. Then we see in the US the same thing. We saw our bases during the last recession starting to be closed down. In which the Communist SOE's like COSCO where then allowed to open up and store weapons, while also using those intelligence bases to cause civil unrest via illegal weapons smuggling and massive US penetration of possible Chinese guerrillas via illegal immigrants. Now we are seeing exactly what I predicted 3 years ago. The US is now shutting down intelligence bases and allowing such intelligence bases as the Communist TORCH program in Idaho & Huwaei in almost every state.
These anti-US normative economic policies have not only hurt our domestic Americana policy, but they have also hugely affected out international economy. Where the US used to be able to trade with countries using their SOE's in a competitive manner for exports. The Communist have been allowed to come in and under cut the US's international exportation of business so much that the US free enterprise have just had to export jobs because they could not compete in the international community for exports. And no you lame economists, it is not because of free trade, as the Communist are not even a fraction of a perfect competitive market partner, nor is it because of they are poor, they are self poor via communist centralization of their wealth to use it to conquer and control international market places.
This then has now caused US statesmen to go begging on hands and knees for communist money and even communist citizens. This furthers the US detrimental domestic national security. As the more the Communist are allowed to implement their SOE's in the US the less international competition we will be able to have. A communist economic theory or anti-US normative policy has a comparative advantage in everything because they do not follow individual desires, fair market practice nor competitive market practices. They follow the Communist constitution of socializing the world for preparation for communism. Which can easily be seen as the Communist party lies about disbanding their SOE's then cloaks them through massive conglomerations and proliferates them throughout the international market places crushing free enterprise with uncompetitive economics. This again can easily be seen through the rare earth deadly debacle. There are over 180 countries out there with rare earth mines. However, the US has allowed the Communist to hold a detrimental 90% of the rare earth market shares.
This then would disprove the idea that the Communist have a comparative advantage for any fair or free market reason. They do not. They are uncompetitive, they are anti-US normative economic policies, and they do not care about spreading the wealth for the international community. Which can be easily seen by their massive proliferation of SOE's in the international community to create a dominance above all other free worlds. So they can follow their Communist Marxist constitution. Which will be done by using SOE's to cause uncompetitive market places. In which the free enterprise will not be able to compete. As such the corporations will be centralized to fight against the Communits SOE's. Then when the wealth is no longer spreading out through fair market normative policies. The US will have to become communist and create massive SOE's to compete. At that point, the Communist will just move into the next phase of Marxism which is complete domination of the world for communism under one currency, one country rule, there rule, and communist enslavement for souls via fictional comparative advantage on which area most dissents against communism.
Rider I
So F Communist and Karl's Marx was a self righteous sinister SOB who wanted to dominate the world and looked for dictators and leaders who would use his and Engels policy of social feudalism instead of free market individual desires.
Please do not tell me it is a conspiracy. I have grown up understanding Communist wishes for world dominance by using Karl's enslavement theory of economics, instead of individual desire free and fair market forces. I do not wish for dominance, I do not wish for any country to have dominance, I do not wish for everyone to be like me. I do not wish for folks to be impoverished. However, I do think the natural law of economics and individual desires can be nicely used for almost all movements of materials from one soul to the next.
Thus, the Democratic Party voted against the use of SOE's to dominate an industry. The Republican party just hated the whole idea because of their hard core values of taxes. In which instead of going the way of regulation via legislation like a an article that would have worked by regulating, non discrimination. Which would have raised the actual pin point target to a t for those who need it. They went very vague and broad and just tried to force everyone. Even though a proper pin point non discrimination would have been the best route and the Republicans could not have said a word because it is a Section 7 Civil rights matter, that needs to be dealt with.
This insurance regulation based on Title 7 would have allowed the necessary need for those who need insurance to obtain it when they need it. As the Insurance industry has business that take home after all is done profits in the billions, this would not have been a problem. The idea that major Democratic leaders still try and use the elementary idea of politics in given somebody something on someone elses back is not US normative policy. At a poverty level, with a non discrimination clause those in need are taken care of. In which it allows those above poverty to be free in their choice.
This idea of freedom of choice and freedom of economics is a normative policy in the US. No matter how much anyone tries term after term politicians on both sides vote down the idea of communized industries. The idea that a luxury program (again not saying the non discrimination part) would be forced upon people before a proper necessity of housing, food, or even military service is not US normative policy. Therefore, It would not make sense to allow in the Communist SOE's to take over industries via supply and demand curve erosion, on other free enterprise market shares, so as to force later in time a proliferation of SOE's just to compete with the SOE's in the US.
This type of Communist SOE allowance is not normative US policy. We have gone to complete nuclear holocaust stand off based on SOE' economics and the idea that the individual should be forced to work for others. We have went to full, scale military defenses of our allies Korea and Vietnam due to countries with this type of economic policy. The US has basically been able to be the bright star of this world not based on above poverty level SOE market share holding. But because of spread out business wealth via individual close to perfect competitive markets.
These competitive markets have allowed the US to be one of the world's best spread of wealth with the most civil rights based on labor ownership for the US citizen to chose what they want to do. As there is no comparison with countries with full scale communized industries which force their people to pay above 50% of their labors to the community. You can't compare US normative policy of individualism and economic freedom via competitive markets and not forced communized markets and communized markets that force their people to pay half of their labors to the community. There is no comparison.
As such the US policy again holds that Communized industries in the US are not US normative policies. As such any allowance of massive foreign Communist SOE's literally in the US is against US normative policy. If you compare US domestic policy on their own allowance of economic civil rights compared to the allowance of foreign Communist entities like Sovereign Wealth Funds and SOE markets that crush competitive markets with their heavy centralizing of wealth in which is then used to control and conquer.
It is one thing for Texas of Alaska that have SOE's that create Sovereign Wealth funds to control and conquer via investments. In which the market price could be cheaper for the citizen if there was more competition. Thus placing the citizens money back in their pockets instead of the rich leading class and how they wish to spend our money and taxes, for control and conquer. The normative policy of the US economics would show that SOE's and the centralization of wealth is not US economic policy. US economic policy is to have more spread out competition, and fair market places; rather than centralized entities that hoard value then use it how they feel necessary for control and conquer of the market places.
Historically, the US has had small centralization of wealth. In which wealth was spread out via military bases. This military base spread out in the US allowed for less guerrilla warfare. However, today in a world of allowance of Communist domination in the international global community we see a detrimental affect to this mindset.
This mindset of anti-US normative economic policies has left the US very vulnerable. Where the US used to have bases in Panama canal we saw US citizens being used as economic warfare agents of the Communist to get the US to disband their bases their so that the Communist could create bases there. Then we see in the US the same thing. We saw our bases during the last recession starting to be closed down. In which the Communist SOE's like COSCO where then allowed to open up and store weapons, while also using those intelligence bases to cause civil unrest via illegal weapons smuggling and massive US penetration of possible Chinese guerrillas via illegal immigrants. Now we are seeing exactly what I predicted 3 years ago. The US is now shutting down intelligence bases and allowing such intelligence bases as the Communist TORCH program in Idaho & Huwaei in almost every state.
These anti-US normative economic policies have not only hurt our domestic Americana policy, but they have also hugely affected out international economy. Where the US used to be able to trade with countries using their SOE's in a competitive manner for exports. The Communist have been allowed to come in and under cut the US's international exportation of business so much that the US free enterprise have just had to export jobs because they could not compete in the international community for exports. And no you lame economists, it is not because of free trade, as the Communist are not even a fraction of a perfect competitive market partner, nor is it because of they are poor, they are self poor via communist centralization of their wealth to use it to conquer and control international market places.
This then has now caused US statesmen to go begging on hands and knees for communist money and even communist citizens. This furthers the US detrimental domestic national security. As the more the Communist are allowed to implement their SOE's in the US the less international competition we will be able to have. A communist economic theory or anti-US normative policy has a comparative advantage in everything because they do not follow individual desires, fair market practice nor competitive market practices. They follow the Communist constitution of socializing the world for preparation for communism. Which can easily be seen as the Communist party lies about disbanding their SOE's then cloaks them through massive conglomerations and proliferates them throughout the international market places crushing free enterprise with uncompetitive economics. This again can easily be seen through the rare earth deadly debacle. There are over 180 countries out there with rare earth mines. However, the US has allowed the Communist to hold a detrimental 90% of the rare earth market shares.
This then would disprove the idea that the Communist have a comparative advantage for any fair or free market reason. They do not. They are uncompetitive, they are anti-US normative economic policies, and they do not care about spreading the wealth for the international community. Which can be easily seen by their massive proliferation of SOE's in the international community to create a dominance above all other free worlds. So they can follow their Communist Marxist constitution. Which will be done by using SOE's to cause uncompetitive market places. In which the free enterprise will not be able to compete. As such the corporations will be centralized to fight against the Communits SOE's. Then when the wealth is no longer spreading out through fair market normative policies. The US will have to become communist and create massive SOE's to compete. At that point, the Communist will just move into the next phase of Marxism which is complete domination of the world for communism under one currency, one country rule, there rule, and communist enslavement for souls via fictional comparative advantage on which area most dissents against communism.
Rider I
So F Communist and Karl's Marx was a self righteous sinister SOB who wanted to dominate the world and looked for dictators and leaders who would use his and Engels policy of social feudalism instead of free market individual desires.
Please do not tell me it is a conspiracy. I have grown up understanding Communist wishes for world dominance by using Karl's enslavement theory of economics, instead of individual desire free and fair market forces. I do not wish for dominance, I do not wish for any country to have dominance, I do not wish for everyone to be like me. I do not wish for folks to be impoverished. However, I do think the natural law of economics and individual desires can be nicely used for almost all movements of materials from one soul to the next.
No comments:
Post a Comment