A bad idea can only survive when you censor dissenting views

Yeah, the US isn’t a democracy, it’s a constitutional republic. There is a difference.

Jan 6th was a real danger to our Republic. And the stimulus checks from trump are Socialism. along with the bailouts to the farmers. and the subsidies to the oil and nat gas industries.

And what's bad with Democratic Socialism if Denmark, the happiest country, has it?

If that is the form of government they want, that is fine. the U.S. is a Republic and that is what I want to keep.

Democratic Socialism is an ECONOMIC model, not a government one!

So let me ask you, how would you scale up and implement the Nordic Model, what you've mistakenly called Democratic Socialism, in a country the size of ours?

I believe there are so many problems that it just wouldn't work here. But for openers, let me toss you a softball. How are you going to get doctors and other medical professionals on board with limiting their incomes by working for state controlled health care? You do realize of course, the only way they can keep health care costs relatively low is to control healthcare 100%, right?

And the tax rates... Using round numbers for the US, let's say a person makes $100K per year. A country like Sweden will tax the individual at something like 55% or 60%. They also tax the employer at a similar rate for what they pay their employees. So for every person making $100K, the govt gets around $110K to $120K per year. Not a bad scheme if you're the govt and can get away with it!

So yeah, the Nordic govts have a lot of money to spend on wonderful programs. The key though, imo, is that they don't spend that money like drunken sailors on shore leave, which is the way our govt spends money. They spend their money responsibly. Can you imagine the drunken spending spree libtards in our govt would go on if they had the kind of money the Nordic model would generate here in the US?

And Norway, omg! Talk about hypocrisy! They've got around $1.2 trillion (yes, TRILLION) dollars sitting in a reserve fund from selling fossil fuels, all while they proceed with their plan to ban autos powered by internal combustion engines as soon as 2025, and ban all ICE sometime shortly thereafter.

Under the Biden presidency, debt has gone down, not up. And yeah, they made money on oil, not saying that's a good thing, never did. It's possible, we just have to TAX OUR RICH MORE. That's the key, yet you don't want to.

"Under the Biden presidency, debt has gone down, not up."

I guess willful ignorance is in play with that comment. Check the numbers again, but this time against pre-pandemic deficits. Anyone with an ounce of objectivity realizes that the Biden administration (controlled by only God knows who) is in favor of spending, period. Spend, spend, spend... even money we don't have. Spend like a drunken sailor! That should be their campaign slogan for when they roll old Dementia Joe out to run again in 2024.

I'm against heavy taxes for everyone, and yes that means the rich (even though I'm far from rich myself...) What I don't believe is the made up concept of the rich paying their 'fair share' when those who make that claim believe the fair share is a higher percentage of their income than others. So if we have to have taxes, I'd be for a flat tax rate so the rich do pay their fair share, meaning the same rate as everyone else. And before you get your panty all wadded up, I'm also for closing out all the loopholes that bought and paid for politicians from both parties have 'liberally' planted in our tax code. Just doing that would level the playing field greatly.

Oh, almost forgot to point out, you completely avoided answering the question I asked. Why am I not surprised? I guess it was a bit much for you to handle...

When someone refuses to answer a question, it's almost always a sign that the person either doesn't have the conviction to back up what they said, or they don't have the facts. Although tbf, usually the two go hand in hand.

What question did I avoid?