As far as free market medical care goes, if one has money to pay out of pocket for a medical procedure they can always get it. In countries with single payer medical care systems there are always private alternatives if one can afford to pay. While I am not a fan of Obamacare I don't see why people feel justified in complaining about it when healthcare prices are dictated by the free market they want to revert back to. Healthcare prices have always been skyrocketing even before Obamacare, the baby boomers just didn't notice it because they didn't need those services until today.
Regardless of a single payer or free market health care system in America the state and federal healthcare regulators need to require healthcare providers to publicly publish current health service prices and outcomes. Why is it when I visit a healthcare facility I always have to sign a waiver saying I am liable for paying for any service the provider deems necessary at whatever price the provider dictates? That is like going into a retail store and the sales associate fills your shopping cart up with whatever unpriced merchandise they think you want and then mail you a bill a few weeks later. It is absurd. I think price and outcome transparency would go a long way to drive down prices.
Also getting rid of for-profit health insurance companies would be a tremendous consumer savings. I have been covered by all the name brand health insurance companies over the years and they provide nothing of value beyond central planing/price fixing with providers. They provide no guidance on cost savings, don't want offend a provider, and I get dozens of bills from all the providers sent directly to me to figure out what was done and if it was necessary. They skim their profits off the top and then make up for it by denying claims or raising prices. The more money that goes directly to the providers the better.
I am a cable card owner and I strongly disagree. Tivo is useless without an expense subscription and it is not PC friendly. Windows Media Center, the only way to record and play back copy-once content on a PC, was abandoned in Windows 10. SiliconDust, makers of the HDHomeRun device I use, are working on a DVR system that is CableCard approved but it has been in development for over a year and it still does not support DRM content. They do have a green android app that can play copy-once content but it is out of date and the new grey app is still waiting to get CableCard approval. Dealing with CableCards is a huge unnecessary pain which is why most non-technical people avoid it and pay set-top box rental fees.
CableCards were mandated by the FCC and without their regulations would not exist at all. CableCard certification, controlled by the cable industry, is intentionally onerous, expensive, and time consuming. How many new CableCard devices have come on the market in the last three years?
While I pay for the cable companies services I should be able to own everything in my house. The cable company certainly doesn't want to own the wiring in my house and they charge a hefty fee to work on it. Many of the copy-once channels already have Internet on-demand services that use built in browser DRM technology and one is free to buy their own cable modem so technology is not a barrier to dumping set-top boxes. There is nothing special about setup boxes except that they are a huge cash cow that the industry has a death grip on. Companies like Microsoft, Google, Sony, and Apply want to build unified entertainment solutions but the telcoms lock them out of the market.
Markets don't exist without competition and the FCC should absolutely open up the TV services to new innovators.
There are a variety of online articles that contradict your claim that independent labor unions are allowed in China such as this one , this one, and this one. Perhaps Chinese labor unions are defined in law but protections are not enforced in practice like their environmental regulations.
Given Chinese censorship of news and social media it is difficult for anyone including Chinese citizens to know exactly what takes place in that country. I am more inclined to believe the accusations of dissidents than the wealthy authoritarian party's propaganda.
Until 1913, customs duties (tariffs) and excise taxes were the primary sources of federal revenue. This was by design of the Constitutional framers. In 1913 the income tax was introduced and coincidentally or not the federal reserve corporation was also established. Provided that globalists corporations shift their tax liability to the most corrupt or more politely business friendly tax haven the funding of the US government falls almost exclusively on the shoulders of the middle class who can afford to pay taxes.
Do not like any provision in this agreement? Tough luck, your elective representatives have no power to enact any change.
This agreement is yet another boon for multinational corporations who own politicians and another step towards global totalitarian government.
Context is everything in regards to free speech. Was the post specifically addressed to the subject, i.e. posted on the subject's facebook page vs their own facebook page. What was the author's psychological profile, i.e. any psychological disorders, recent unemployment, history of violence, etc. From what I have researched on the web this guy in urban dictionary terms is a "poser" who is obnoxious and crass but otherwise harmless. The subject was right in alerting authorities and in addition they should have obtained a restraining order against Anthony as well as acquired a firearm to protect themselves. Certainly law enforcement should investigate all perceived threats and in this case they did.
Perhaps his biggest mistake was to fantasize about harming an FBI agent. In a police state any public dissention or insubordination to government authority must be met with harsh retaliation to set an example. We will see if the current supreme court, strict constructionists who deem even money a form of speech, will decide that his speech was protected or that it was illegal and consequentially grant the government power to arbitrarily imprison people solely based verbal expression.
The absent ones are always at fault.