Monday, February 16, 2009

Why Socializing America is bad

I have heard a lot of talk lately about socialism and the idea of nationalizing various aspects of America. I have heard how this group or that think it’s a good idea. I have heard how some think this is a direction America must take.

But in every case I am aware of, not a single one of those people promoting nationalizing whatever have lived in a socialist nation.

I have heard how great national healthcare can be. Yet thousands spend enormous amounts of money to come to America for our capitalist, market driven healthcare. Because it is the best in the world.

When it comes to banks and finance there is much the same kind of situation. People speak of redistribution of wealth. Evening the playing field. And placing ever more of a burden on the ”rich” while ensuring that the poor have no option beyond the Government.

Let me say something of personal experience to all of this. I have lived in a socialist nation. I am not from one, but I did live - not visit or vacation - in the old Soviet Union. I lived in Moscow and Tsbilsi. I have visited Latvia, and other parts of the old communist regime. So I have some experience in this debate. Far more than those in favor of nationalization.

The fact is that I witnessed the healthcare system firsthand. It was deplorable. When I had a tooth that was in severe condition I went to a local Moscow dentist. The room was filled with people waiting to see the dentist. When I signed in, the only question I was asked was if I was paying in rubles or dollars. I had both, and was told dollars were better.

I was ushered into the dentist’s office, ahead of people that had been waiting hours, within 5 minutes of entering the office. My first impression of the room was a white ceramic version of medieval dungeons I had seen on television. The equipment I saw around the room were working versions of equipment over 30 years old.

When the dentist confirmed that I had paid the huge sum of $20 American, worth more than 500 times the fee in rubles, I was provided an anesthetic. This was something that only the international cash paying customers received. Novocain. Not watered down or otherwise diluted, nor other lesser medications that regular citizens receive. And I had my tooth pulled. I was out of the office in roughly 30 minutes.

And every face in that room knew they could not afford and thus would not receive the same service I had just gotten.

When it comes to finance I prefer to look at the daily life of the average person. I lived in an apartment like anyone else. The cost was a $10 a month, or 1000 times it’s value. I had someone who shopped for meat and bread for me. That cost another $20 dollars.

I went out a few times to get food from the store myself while I lived in Russia. The lines were at least an hour long, just for general foods. The cold cuts were of a quality too low to ever be served in any American store. The selection of foods were minimal. The cost was next to nothing. But when I say the quality was low, I mean that some of the canned meats were the exact look, smell, and consistency of middle brand dog food I served my pets in California.

But it was enough to keep me alive. Though if you have ever waited for 2 hours in a line during a Russian winter, you would question how much fun life really is.

Mind you that 3 blocks from the office I worked at in Moscow, there was a McDonald’s. At almost any point in the year there was a line no less than 3 hours long (the longest I ever personally saw was 8 hours) just to get into that McDonald’s. They would let in groups of 20 – 30 people at a time. It was the largest McDonald’s I have ever seen anywhere, and I believe it is the largest in the world.

You could cut the line for all of 500 rubles, which was an inordinate price for the average citizen. Inside I could buy enough food for a family of 5 for less than the equivalent of $5 American. That same amount of food required that the people on the line, from across the USSR, had saved money from the entire family for a year, just to spend a vacation to get to this fast food restaurant. Many would leave McDonald’s and start the trip back home, the vacation starting with and ending in that one place.

When I took a cab ride to anywhere it was always the same. A cab stops and negotiation begins. Where are you going, does the cabbie want to go there, what time of day it was, were you paying in dollars or rubles, how much are you willing to pay. If all of it lined up, you had a ride. If not, you hailed another cab. And there was always another cab to be had, since only the rich could afford such a luxury on a regular basis.

I recall watching people getting on lines at 4am because the bread delivery had arrived. If you waited you might not get any bread and there would be no more. The bread was free, if it was available.

I recall walking into stores that were completely empty, because there was no food delivered yet and the shelves were bare. And I recall the lines when a delivery came, while the best meats were sold out the back of the store to those that paid far more than most could gather on a regular basis.

And I recall the trading. A chit to get shoes traded for a chit for sugar. 2 of those could get you a chit for meat. And maybe 3 of those can get you a chit for vodka, which could get you a bunch of anything else.

All of this is not to say that the people were anything but fair and friendly. I never had a problem while I was living in the USSR. Well, except for the civil war and attempted coup. The people though were salt of the earth.

But when I listen to the talk of socialized this and that, from people who have never lived under such a way of life I shiver. I don’t like socialism, or communism. Not because of some ideology, but because I lived it. I lived it the best way possible and it still left me cold and miserable in a way that the worst winter storms and double pneumonia never could.

Ask anyone that has lived in a socialist or communist country. I’ve never heard one say that life was better there. And the person you ask can be poor as hell. Because the quality of life in America is about as good as you can get. Problems and all.

So I don’t agree with celebrities, far-left liberals, politicians and so many others that think the idea in their head will be better than the lives we live. But if you let them keep changing the laws, and experimenting with our lives, you will know what it’s like to have less than you ever thought you could survive on.

I can only hope I am dead long before that day comes.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Do celebrity endorsements help Presidential candidates? - 7.18.2007.1

Politics and Hollywood. These 2 go together like white on rice, and are separate like oil and water. It’s something that is a big deal if you have it and not a big issue if you don’t. At least among pundits.

For those that are more Democrat, and/or liberal, Hollywood and the entertainment industry it represents are flag bearers of causes such as the environment or retreating from Iraq. To a smaller extent the more centrist views are held there as well with few (though often powerful) conservative or Republican issues as well. Because of this, and the fact that Hollywood support means large money donations and lots of faces with access to the media touting your candidate, most would enjoy having the top of the Hollywood elite joining their side.

One of the most powerful, Picture found at http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-et-cause18jul18,0,7926476.storyMs. Oprah Winfrey, is making the most of this. Ms. Winfrey joined others in support of Senator Obama in April. Her public declaration carries a lot of weight in most subjects. A book or movie that can boast her thumbs up can often be assured of success. Now we will see if this translates into the political world as well.

Possibly the first example of that transition may be in an up-coming fund-raiser at Ms. Winfrey’s home. Already invitations have been sent out to various entertainment figures, and there is limited space. Each RSVP includes a $2300 donation to Senator Obama, with dinner and time to get personal for those that get combined donations of $50,000 or more.

It’s a lot of money potentially, and obviously a lot of media attention. It gives pause to the Senator Clinton political machine that had previously held the lead on Hollywood endorsements.

But is that really important? Besides the tons of money that ensures advertisements and fliers, and makes the candidates beholden to the interests of big donors, what else is there? Do people with less than extreme fervor really care if celebrity XYZ likes this politician or the other?

While Ms. Winfrey is a coup for Senator Obama, being the first she has endorsed and is pushing to support, does that really equate to voters? I can see her causing more books to be sold, or a movie to get higher ticket sales, but votes? Do people trust ANY entertainer to tell them who is the best politician, especially when it comes to the Presidency?

It’s an interesting question. One that will soon be found out. There is no doubt that a great deal of attention will be paid to who shows up for this fund-raising event. More than a few celebrities and entertainers will be questioned about their endorsement, both tacit and explicit. But what will it matter?

I wonder if Senator Obama, or Senator Clinton, or even Mr. Rudy Giuliani as examples were endorsed by Snoop Dogg if that would help them or hurt them. Does that change in any manner the quality of the candidate? If it does, why?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates
Ask for ad rates