>>>>>>Could you all find a different word to "socialism" because you are light years away from it and you aren't heading towards it so you are all debasing the word.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nicholas, with each passing decade, the United States is indeed moving closer to it. It happens in many ways - including the corruption of non-philosphical premises of the American public.
>>>>>
>>>>>The politics of the "scare tactic" really aren't helpful in debate. Obama is not a socialist and I see no desire for socialism in the US but its a handy stick to beat your opponents. Bush wasn't a fascist and Obama isn't a socialist. I would describe US politics as Republican and Republican Lite.
>>>>
>>>>Hmmm. I'm curious, when you sell your property in England, does it require a special goverment inspector to ensure it meets federal 'green' standards before you can sell? I wasn't aware that a HIP pack required a government inspector. I thought it was a statement of the energy efficiency and compliance for the buyers but not meeting specific green levels would not prevent the sell of the home. Is it different?
>>>
>>>
>>>And you call that socialism.
>>>
>>>If thats all you've got the left are turning in their graves
>>
>>If you got that meaning from my post, then I phrased it poorly. I call that excessive government control of the people and private property. I asked you a question if that is the case in England or not, but you didn't answer. Is it?
>
>Its not relevant. Governments always have policies to try and shape the economy and society. The argument is about the current administration and are they leading the US to socialism. That is (to be frank ) laughable, show me nationalisation of key industries and redistribution of wealth. Your government always controls you to some extent, its called living in a country .

My question is not relevant? It was to me.