Some thought.:
The two parties are what make up a functional politcal environment and keeps the United States running.
Radical ideas are generally not good ideas for business. Being socially and/or economically too far to the left or right is dangerous for nations and individuals.
- Communism/Revolutionary Socialism
- National Socialism, fascism
- Anarchist
Some other groups are radical for the (1) behavior or (2) departure from acknowledged working systems.
- Libertarians (2)
- Al Qaeda (1), Christian Radicals(1/2), Zionists Extremists(1).
What's fair isn't always best when thinking in terms of national interests. Fair isn't usually popular enough to get votes anyway.
- Yes I know: "What's popular isn't always right, and what's right isn't always popular. It's true, but this is the real world.
- Politicians have to balance what is "right in a moral vacuum" with what is right in realistic situations, much of the complex needs of individual nations can't be clearly separated between right and wrong in a world with many different ideas about what's moral and with many different domestic and international interests.
I am not for Universal Healthcare/Socialized Medicine, but it wouldn't be the end of the world either. People assume that our taxes will goto the heights of other countries like England, France, etc. This is unlikely, taxes will go up but a US version of UH/SM would probably be more subsidization of private medical and pharmaceutical companies. Gas will not be $10/gallon and incomes taxes will not go up to EU levels. Hell, a 1% national sales tax would probably pay for it, if we could manage the existing debt.
Why am I against it? I am uninsured, make almost nothing, and I do not want others to pay for my problems. However, if it is in the national interest to provide healthcare to make sure that they have bodies to work and fight, then so be it. I don't think it is.
Kinda on topic, if I were a registered Republican I would probably vote for anyone who is not: Ron Paul (a radical, but a really nice, well meaning guy) or Guliani (a fascist who tries to ban art, doesn't know about national or international politics, prefers fascist/Nazi/neocon style economics through allocation). If I were a registered democrat I would probably vote for Hilary (due to my interest in how the world views us), Obama is inexperienced, Edwards is confused, but honestly I don't know enough about either parties candidates to decide yet.
I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.
