Welcome to this site! E.Q.M.C.


This is a start of a new political movement in the USA. I believe that to affect change in congress, we the middle class needs to cease electing mostly rich people to represent us. They do not think the way middle class people do, on the whole. The country of the USA continues to have high deficits, wars they may not want to be involved in, the tuition rates at public universities are sky-high, etc.

We must make a concerted effort to vote for and bring candidates forward from the middle class. I think the best way to do this is with starting a new political party, specifically to elect qualified middle class individuals.

My book outlining these ideas, is in progress, and will be going to a literary agent in the next 12 months or so. Hopefully it will be published. If not, I do plan to self-publish.

I call on all fellow reasonably-minded people, democrats, republicans, independents, green party, libertarians, union members, and all other motivated Americans to help with this movement and this blog, which is started now to help gather activists who are interested.

21 thoughts on “welcome

  1. Amen!!! I couldn’t agree more. People think that electing rich people means they’ll show us their secrets. Instead, they continue to line their own pockets, not ours….at least in recent times. In addition, we need to change the campaign finance laws so all viable candidates receive a certain amount of money and time on air…no more. At the present, only the rich can afford to run.. or those who accept financing from interested persons who expect a return payoff in terms of legislation. Shocking. Thanks for your movement.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I think that most of the voters who supported Trump were of this mind. They did not want a Nanny State telling them how to raise their children, what to tech them in school and a host of other items. Also, they are very much concerned about all of the freebies that some want without the consequences of how to pay for them. I believe that most working, middle class Americans do not ant to saddle their children and grandchildren with a debt that will never be paid off. So many of the new socialist Democrats want to give free college education, universal Medicare and other benefits without thinking about where the money is going to come from to pay for all of the freebies.

    America and even Sweden have been able to work because they are meritocracies. In Sweden the semi-socialist economy has been able to work because until the last decade or two it was a homogeneous society where everyone understood that the system worked because every one in it worked. There were no freeloaders. Now with an influx of refugees and immigrants who do not abide by the social contract that was among native Swedes, the system is approaching collapse. Swedes were willing to pay high taxes in the 50% range because they new that the system was benefiting them and they were getting a just return on investment: free university and other higher education, free medical care and other benefits. However, with a torrent of people now entering the country and wanting these benefits without having paid into the system the quality of these benefits is dropping. Soon the country will no longer be able to care for its inhabitants in the same way.

    Just beware the Jabberwocky. Unintended consequences of actions.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I do not believe one can compare Sweden to the US. Blaming all problems on immigrants is an excuse. The reasons for a circumstance in society are not so simple. The reasons are almost always much more more complex than a glance will tell you. Sweden did not have a strong economy to begin with, with too many socialized, governmental businesses and few global trade agreements. Economists have said this about Scandinavia for years. A society more based on capitalist efforts, in history are more able to survive. The US thrived and grew with immigrants to where we are now. What do you think taxes are for? Just to make the politicians rich or to have the affordability of health care for the citizens?

      A nation needs healthy citizens to progress and work. Canada provides health care by removing the health insurance companies from the equation. Many nations with universal care have removed the health insurers. In 2014, the health insurance industry was the highest paid industry in the USA. CEO Hemsley of UnitedHealth made 66 million in one year, 2014. So much for CEO’s wanting to bring down costs? Canada regulates pharmacy and many Americans buy prescriptions from Canada, because they are too expensive here. Canada pays for it with personal (sales taxes, also) and business taxes. Free is not what is desired. Affordability is the goal. p.s. the debt is rising now under the current President. p.s.s. I never used the word “utopia”.


      1. I live in Canada and can tell you that health care up here is not the utopian plan that you and others think. Most provinces are pretty good at taking care of life threatening and emergency events. However, there is a dearth of doctors. I know the situation in BC fairly well and in many locations from Vancouver to the smallest town you cannot find a family physician. You have to go to a walk-in clinic where you see a doctor who has no knowledge of your history or has a personal relationship with you. What that means is that if you have a long term illness, you are up the creek. People use the ER as their doctor. NOT GOOD, anywhere.

        People with a knowledge of BIG PHARMA understand the issue with prices to be something entirely different than what most believe. Many nations buy drugs through a central government purchasing. They in turn place large orders and can bargain the companies down. However, because the USA doen’t work this way and large private organizations do the buying they jack up the US prices to subsidize the foreign market. I agree that something needs to be done but is central government buying the best solution. Again, looking at Canada to see if they have a solution. All that I know is that not all of the drugs available to the world and especially in the USA are available in Canada. We had a friend who needed a pacemaker. He did his research and found that one brand had the highest rating and he wanted that unit put into his heart. BC did not use that brand. He flew to Rancho Mirage, CA and had it put in at Eisenhower Memorial Hospital. There is a multi tiered system in Canada. Those who can afford to travel to another country get their operations when they need them in a timely manner before their condition become dire. I think that this is true in all of the socialized medicine countries.

        What I wrote about earlier about Sweden is from a recent study. All socialized countries will fail soon because of at least one trend: an aging population. Japan and China are both looking at this time bomb as are the western European countries. Even the USA is slowly catching up to this statistic. Western civilizations and other countries that have become westernized have had fertility rates that do not allow for replacement of population, let alone growth. In many countries, China in particular, thought that having babies was a negative for whatever reasons. Now they are paying for their lack of replacement planning for their populations.

        I find it very interesting that nobody moves to, immigrates to or seeks to find long term refugee status in socialized countries. Nobody goes to Cuba or to Venezuela. In fact they flee from them.

        In the USA, we don’t need free education, we need lower cost education. We don’t need free medicare, we need affordable. There is “no such thing as a free lunch” you are going to pay for it one way or another. Beware of unointended consequences.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. 1. if you have proof of why no insurance or insurance that does not cover pre-existing condition are better than such a health plan that Canada has, then present the proof

          2. there are countless horror stories in the US, pre ACA heath care and recently such as people with diabetes who cannot afford their medication, so they take a lesser dose and end up dying.

          3. I know more about Canada than you think. I have visited there many times. I know someone with a non-top rated pace-maker. It is still ticking after about 7 years.

          4. I found articles about Sweden that say that the main problem was they accepted too many immigrants at one time and that the jobs available are for more educated people and that is why the immigrants have a higher unemployment rate. There was mention of immigrants earnestly searching for work, not about free-loaders.

          5. people who enter the higher paying professions like medicine, law, and business do not want work in rural areas where they are paid less. Is that the government’s fault?

          6. Thanks for your information about drug pricing. I know very little about that. It was in the US news a few weeks ago that Trump is making Medicare buy pharmaceuticals according to other countries prices. I have forgotten the details.

          7. I believe there is more than one reason why Big Pharma sells drugs to US customers at such high costs, not just what you mention, private instead of the national buying “do the buying they jack up the US prices to subsidize the foreign market.” For, example, The US customers live in a very prosperous country; therefore they are willing to pay more. Big Pharma takes advantage of that fact and charge the most and higher than people can afford; some Americans have better prescription Insurance coverage and some have crappy or not so good coverage. People scrimp. save and I have heard of Americans, before ACA (Affordable Care Act) eating cat tuna for meals so they could afford their medications.

          Doctors, do overprescribe, especially anti-biotics, but mostly I think they prescribe what the patients need or what they were trained to prescribe in medical school. The doctors have to keep up the latest research, of course. But Big Pharma is way out whack with what the hospitals are doing. Hospitals and doctors have a great deal more ethics, I believe. The prime recent horrible action of Big Pharma is the opioid crisis. I don’t think it can all be blamed on Big Pharma. I would place about 70% -80% of the blame on Big Pharma. The rest of the 20% -30% blame, I would put on the prescribing doctors and the illegal drug dealers/cartels. The addicts also have blame for popping pills and not managing their pain reasonably.

          Big Pharma in the US is paying their top CEO’s millions and billions annually. That is a fact. The cost of our medications in the USA is related to how much the execs are earning and how much the Big Pharma sales people are paid to promote drugs at physicians’ offices. Is this going on in Canada to such an extent?

          Ten years ago, many, many Americans were buying prescriptions from Canada, by crossing the border or by on-line services. Now there are a multitude of countries who have entered this market to sell to Americans: “Australia, Barbados, India, Israel, Italy, Mauritius, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom play a larger role in meeting this demand.” https://www.pharmacychecker.com/international-pharmacy-regulations/

          In 2014, Canada’s Big Pharma Industry was rated 8th in the world. https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/joseph-soares/canada-big-pharma_b_5657849.html
          That would tell one that the US’s Big Pharma is huge compared to Canada’s.

          No one I know in Ontario has complained of a dearth of doctors. They do mention some long waits for certain things. Somebody did have a long period of time before their pre-teen or teen child was diagnosed with spina bifida. The child was finally diagnosed by an American doctor who was working part-time in Ontario.

          I hope the progressing law suits against Big Pharma result in CEO’s being put into prison for life. It will very likely, not happen because the US law statutes have a severe double standard for white collar criminals. The corporations can commit murder and cause ruined lives, but the most they, usually, ever get are monetary fines. Our congress wants to keep it that way. So many of them own big companies, corporations, or have big dividends coming into their coffers.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. if you think hospitals have such great ethics, might i suggest you take a close look at all the over inflated hospital charges for aspirin, benadryl tabs, services never performed etc…

            Liked by 1 person

  3. I’m not sure I can wrap my brain around this idea of electing more from the middle class because they are from the middle class. I’m all for electing more people from any class who understand and respect our Constitution. People who will swear to protect, defend and enforce our Constitution.
    If we could do that, we would taking a giant step towards solving many of the problems created by ignoring the Constitution. America sees no class distinction, everyone is free to fail or succeed. Opening the freedom for those who succeed is far more important than propping up those who fail and blame their failure on something else.
    The only “like minded people” I want running are those with like minds regarding our Constitution.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. 10-26-18
    Hello Chuck – Thanks for you comment. Here are some of my reasons for advocating for a middle class party in the US:

    [1.] Our country is now 242 years old but the state of our country is in need of repair, just as you specify in your fourth sentence,”If we could do that, we would taking a giant step towards solving many of the problems created by ignoring the Constitution…” This country is in a state of strife and disharmony. We have bombing attempts and hateful rhetoric.

    [2.] We have rampant and excessive obstruction by an excessive number of higher officials. Some or many do not recognize the need for bi-partisanship.

    [3.] The rich in congress are now more than 50% millionaires, which does not match the middle class proportion. It is an extremely lopsided number, to say the least.

    Hawkings, David. Wealth of Congress: Richer than ever, but mostly at the very top. Roll Call. [Online] The Economist Group. 2 27, 2018.

    When our representatives enter office for ulterior motives or too often make decisions to help themselves, rather than for the majority, therein, is the crux of the problem. I will give you one recent example. When the tax reform of 2016 was passed and highly promoted by President Trump, the previous I.R.S. tax code for Real Estate developers was not left without changing it. The tax code prior to that time already was highly favorable for developers, with them, more often than not, paying little or no taxes. The new tax reform made the favorability for those companies, corporations, and individuals in the real estate industry, specifically helpful for the president. After president Trump is out of office and even now while his sons handle his business, less taxes will be owed.

    The constitution clarifies that no president may gain from their office of the presidency: “Title VI: Conflict of Interest and Disclosure= – Prohibits any public official from using his official position or office to obtain financial gain for himself, any member of his household, or any business with which he or a member of his household is associated, other than that compensation provided by law.” There is another clause that states that a president is exempt from conflicts of interests but it does not that say they are allowed to have monetary gain or other kinds of gains from being in the office. The other two major clauses, as I understand the constitution are the “Take Care Clause” and “The Emolument Clause”.


    An additional example which I have heard about, not on the news but from a resident in Nevada, someone writing about it on AOL comments, is about Democrat Harry Reid, who represented Nevada, now retired. I just googled it and found this article.


    He rose to Senate majority leader and was found to have been untruthful on disclosure forms and that he made 1.1 million on a land deal but the details were hidden. He even paid back over $31,000 after buying gifts with campaign money from his granddaughter, who owned a jewelry line.

    [4.] I believe that a very good number of Americans do believe that all politicians are crooked. The reasons they loathe or distrust our leaders include because they see leaders get richer while in office. Middle class people struggle. Even, little things like the federal government’s law to lower the volume of commercials on T.V, about 3-8 years ago, never really resulted in a great change. I don’t know about you? I still hear loud commercials after the law was passed. The corporations and the advertisers, somehow, won out. They decreased the volume by such a tiny fraction,that it is not noticeable. Our aggravation and discomfort of commercials playing so much louder than the regular T.V. shows were not important. Humans’ ear drums are not important. Americans who are aggravated must use the remote to mute or lower when a loud commercial comes on. They sell more because of the loudness, or they think that they sell more. We do not want the short end of the stick.

    [5] We, the middle class, mostly die and fight in our wars, that the mostly rich (elected) decide to push us into those wars. Think about it. It was GW Bush, from a very rich oil family who led us into battle in Iraq. It was Nixon (a rich president, who wisely put his assets into a blind trust) but who got himself elected by throwing a wrench into L.B.Johnson’s peace plan for the Vietnam war. He killed many thousands of American soldiers by his evil “snake action.” I could go and on, by doing more research, but I am no historian.

    [6.] The definition of democracy does not imply proportional representation. The definition demands a proportional representation of the citizens. We have no democracy when the people with middle class backgrounds, values, and ideals, are not in the majority. A democratic republic, which we are, also must have representatives who represent the entire population.

    [7.] If you expect a person who used their money to get elected and who lived 20 years in the business world, perhaps as a shareholder of a huge corporation and on 3 boards of directors, to have your or my best interests in mind, when working for us as a Senator or Representative…well I don’t think so. That is not just my opinion.

    [8.] “Wealth and power are intertwined” per Dr. Domhoff who is in his early 80’s and is a professor emeritus. This is a great website based on his classic book “Who Rules America” (in its 6th edition) for people who believe in fairness and who do not believe in wealth being concentrated in the top 1% to 5% which can destabilize society.

    when you get a chance, maybe you can read a few sections of this site


    Have you ever seen a thick heavy English ivy? If you have ever seen the 8-10 inch thick branches of English ivy smothering and wrapping around the trunk of a tall mature tree, that is what the power and wealth “intertwining” reminds me of. The middle class and the poor would represent the tree, wrapped by the English Ivy (the very rich) that is difficult to get rid of in the garden or on trees.

    There is a blogger on wordpress, a retired journalist, who wrote a blog about Rushkoff’s (a prolific author) meeting
    with 5 billionaires or multi-billionaires from the hedge-fund industry, who have a great fear of the middle class and/or poor rising up against them. I was extremely surprised, in fact, awestruck, to learn that fact, as were other commenters after the blog. The hedge-funders paid Rushkoff a huge amount of money to give a speech about technology’s future. Rushkoff, subsequently wrote about the hedge-funders’ fears, such as using locks to protect food from angry mobs, “…Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers — if that technology could be developed in”…” Elon Musks’s idea of earth people living on Mars was discussed. Rushkoff was so surprised that these billionaires thought that things were so “far gone” and that treating their servants or guards kindly would never be helpful to protect them. Rushkoff suggested that would be the best way to proceed, but the billionaires scoffed at it.


    [9.] Dr. Domhoff in his book, states that third parties based on class, ethnicity, or religion are the ones that are more successful in other countries on earth.

    Domhoff, G. William. Who Rules America? Power, Politics, and Social Change. [ed.] Emily Barrosse. 5. New York : McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2006. pp. 136-137. 0-07-287625-5

    [10.] I will end with the main reason as I see it. If we do not make the effort to take a hold of our future, then things will not change. We must vote for people like us and we must step up to run for office. People who love money and are determined to become richer, show no evidence of living by our founder fathers’ tenets (the US constitution).

    Yes, George Washington and many or most of all politicians elected to office came from the aristocrat class. He and Thomas Jefferson, and the rest wrote a liberal document instituting that Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness plus the fact that all men are created equal, were paramount. They never once stated in the declaration of Independence that corporations had more rights than individuals, nor that people with more money had more rights to be elected to office. The declaration of I. is the foundation of our law statutes.

    According to what I have read they did mention a dislike for political parties. Tell me one good reason why that set of circumstances of the rich controlling the decisions over our country, why it should stay that way?

    p.s. my argument is not about looking down on those who succeed. It is not about giving failures their chances and then blaming whomever. Your words: “Opening the freedom for those who succeed is far more important than propping up those who fail and blame their failure on something else…” Please do not put words into my mouth. Where in my blog did I say something similar to your thoughts?

    <<<<<<<Mr. Chuck Diaz, please point out my exact wording (somewhere in my blog) that matches your statement about not opening the freedom and blaming failure on something else. I await your answer on these points. Allowing a failing to continue, is our fault. We cannot keep on voting for people who do represent themselves and not us, the majority.
    I do not hate corporations, nor do I say that the rich or corporations are the enemies. *** I state that more fairness is needed for a healthy government process.*** Freedom to succeed also has to do with FAIR CAMPAIGN ELECTION LAW. *** If the main factor to get elected is tons of money, then the result is that many good people are lost in the shuffle. We have a magnificent country but the aspect that is totally NOT magnificent is the way the top rich of both the Democrat Party and the Republican Party have a "hold" on our decisions and do not proceed to change the things that need changing such as strengthening social security, which is discussed below.

    p.s.s. My rudimentary vision is: to attempt bring in more people to represent us who think reasonably, not thinking with their pocket book or their bank account. PREVIOUS MATERIAL SUCCESS IS NOT THE MEASURE TO GOVERN WITH REASON. We probably have many more reasonable decision-makers in local offices than in our highest offices. Nonetheless, even in local elections and appointments, money is very important. In Canada, they have a constitution that prohibits the use of social security money to be used for anything but social security. Our shaky/insolvent social security assets have been borrowed from by the House of Representative (who hold the purse) who oversee the budget, time and time again. Why haven't they passed an amendment or a major bill to put social security on firmer ground? Canada did that very thing early in the formation of their country. I have been told this fact by a Canadian. I could not find a citation to back it up.

    I apologize for getting so wordy. I love to write.
    Of course, so many of my ideas are not fleshed out on my small blog. My book, hopefully, will be better at bringing out my explanations and mission statements. As I envision this new political movement, a majority vote by the party members will decide if one penny in campaign donations will be taken from rich people. I believe that the moral compass of a middle class party would proceed better without rich people's money. But, there are some probably, very moral rich people such as Tom Steyer, Warren Buffet, and even Oprah Winfrey. That is just my opinion.



    1. I am just going to comment on one tiny bit of your commentary. Most infrastructure in the US is handled at local levels: cities, townships, counties and states not by the Federal government. Also, most of the politicians at these levels are from the working class.

      The reason for decrepit infrastructure is that repairing and maintaining infrastructure is not SEXY. It is expensive and even in the private sector going down to private homes, if something else is deemed more necessary maintenance is delayed. The longer maintenance is delayed the acceleration of the maintenance issue increases and the cost increases.

      New construction is SEXY. Therefore if the county commissioners want to be reelected, they will build something new rather than repave a street or repair or replace a hundred year old sewer line. This routine will continue until the voters set their priorities.

      Furthermore, social programs suck the money from maintenance. No need to elaborate on this it is prima facie.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. As I only state truth, you have my permission. There is a lot of mythology about health care in Canada which is unfortunate. What they have is better than nothing but not as good as can be. About three decades ago some minister decided that Canada had too many doctors. Hence the decision was made not to build more teaching hospitals or medical schools. Now Canada must import almost all of its doctors. My wife and I do not have a single native Canadian doctor and between us we have about six. These doctor are good. But what happened?

          Liked by 1 person

      1. I searched where I mentioned infrastructure. I did mention it on the welcome post, I think. I agree with these reasons you mention are likely the main reasons that infrastructure suffers. I would add that the big corporations who get away with not contributing enough to taxes, thereby, allowing their CEO’s to make millions and billions is another main reason. Your statement that voters need to set their priorities, I find that a bit confusing. Voters want good roads without potholes and bridges that do not cause injuries and fall down.

        I know someone who is a civil engineer. Civil engineers are mostly just middle class. They make the recommendations. Unless they get elected to higher or local official positions to force more infrastructure spending in the important committees or on local councils, then it probably won’t happen in a timely manner. Those convincing speeches on the floor of the senate and house, are sometimes the most important things to make spending bills move. That is my guess. From what I can tell, a lot of engineers are mathematics focused and not politically-minded. My dad was an engineer, not civil. My dad was almost a voracious newspaper reader, 2 newspapers every day. He was a staunch republican.

        As for social programs, social programs that have rampant or a medium amount of fraud such as disability and welfare do take money away from all of government money, not just from “maintenance,” I would say.

        I believe that people on welfare are being groomed along for generations by us, the middle class and the rich. The poor who depend on welfare, many with drug problems, alcohol problems, and just families that are so used to it for too many generations, the system is at fault or partially at fault. There must be a way to get many of them out of that rut, maybe within 5 generations or so. Bill Clinton is the only president since FDR to make a drastic change to welfare. There is a certain percentage that need welfare for no fault of their own. My grandmother was a single mother for some time. She had 3 kids. My mom’s family lived in public housing for some years and welfare until my grandma had a factory job. Or I think they moved when my grandma remarried. She retired from the same factory she started at after 20-25 yrs. I think. But she only received social security. Her sister and brother-in-law (my great aunt and great uncle) obtained jobs at a union plant and they ended up with a pension + social security. They had it made, compared to my grandma. Good thing, my grandma was so frugal.

        There is also a line of thinking among some liberals, that the rich want to keep the poor on welfare, so they don’t rise up against the rich. I think there may be some validity in that. I am not sure.


  5. Without dragging this on, my primary disagreement with your “more middle class” idea is that it assumes there are no crooks in their class. All the crooked politicians are individual crooked people and the middles class probably has just as many.
    I contend we need to return to our Constitution, we must teach it, our founding and Western Culture. We must get back to America and not elect America hating anti constitutionalists.
    If you care to continue our discussion, try not covering so many subjects and let’s debate on one subject at a time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I suppose it comes down to this. If you believe that middle class people have the same mindsets as very rich people, then my premise would not be acceptable to your way of thinking (mindset). I believe that some or many middle class individuals and poor working people (not dependent on welfare) make their decisions with more reason and do not jump to conclusions that their grandchildren will never have to worry about huge debt-loads and deficits, in addition to not worrying about other problems in our country.

      A rich person has an obvious reason to NOT worry about rising taxes, huge debt-loads and deficits, nor about paying for their health care, for example. The reason is that the rich have a huge “cushion” of money, stock, property, and assets. The “cushion” of assets equates with them having a mindset of minimal or zero worry compared to the average middle class American individual. As you know, the typical middle class and poor individuals, very often have trouble to make ends meets, let alone to build up a very large savings account, similarly to what the rich build up.

      As for your statement that “the middle class probably has just as many” crooks; the social scientific evidence, highly contradicts this statement.

      The rich who own the corporations, kill more by pollution, work-related and consumer violations than street criminals. In the USA, in the year 2013, the companies, factories, and corporations killed 318,368 people; whereas the street murderers killed 23,271. That means that in the year 2013, there was a difference of 295,000 more killed by the rich who get richer while running their companies. http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-poorcrime.htm.

      Killing and death is just one aspect of crime; I contend that it is a very important aspect when comparing the rich people’s disregard in poring pollution into our rivers, and other actions that kill people. I will not continue this discussion with other types of crimes, such as fraud, drug smuggling, rape, etc. I did learn in graduate school that the poor and minorities are arrested more by police, not because they commit so much more crime, but because of profiling and common practice by police departments. The police do not concentrate on arresting individuals in the suburbs nor in rich neighborhoods.

      p.s. When a congress person has stock (some receiving huge dividends) in the Health industries plus they are lobbied by lobbyists employed by the Health Care Insurance and Health Industry, a high number in congress will see no need to make health care affordable for the middle class and poor. Please do no forget that large or huge campaign donations from the Health Industry, Health Insurance, and Big Pharma definitely influence congress people who want that flow of money for their campaigns. There are so many Western, modern nations that have put into place a Universal Health Care System. German, British, and other legislators, apparently, think more reasonably than American legislators. Believing in helping your average fellow Country-person is absent in our congress, my fellow American. That is how I see it. We are behind the times, by many, many years. Canada instituted full doctor and hospital coverage in 1972. It was a long process, starting in 1916.

      There are Americans who are now ex-patriates, who relocated to other countries because they cannot stand living around an abundance of Americans who like our almost pure-capitalism system. These ex-patriates are so disillusioned by not having Universal Care in the US, also called Nationalized Medical Care, that they moved their families or as individuals, gave up American citizenship or no longer have American passports. Some of them were retired when they moved or they retained jobs in the country that accepted them. The Affordable Care Act is a step in the right direction.



      1. This is really going to be my last comment here. You chastise the person from Canada for not having proof and then you use nothing but hearsay information. It is obvious you know nothing of our Constitution and as far as I’m concerned you are a Democratic Socialist masking as person wanting a middle class takeover, That’s the same theme as any power seeking political party uses.
        You seem to dislike Capitalism without understanding what it is. It is the purest form of freedom any people could ask for when it is followed.
        I will no longer respond to your lack of knowledge statements.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Regarding your words “This is really going to be my last comment here. You chastise the person from Canada for not having proof”
          1. It is my right and my freedom of speech to tell another commenter that they should not put words into my mouth. Freedom of Speech is an extremely important section of the constitution. Mr. Diaz, You have written a book about the consitution, so maybe you should understand it better than I. I have never read the entire constitution.

          2. Most of my knowledge about Canada’s universal care (which is split into provinces) is about the province of Ontario. I have relatives in Ontario. I learned from someone (a native Canadian in British Columbia or Quebec, I don’t remember) about 9-12 months ago, that each province is dis-similar and has varying ways of giving out health care. In Ontario, the sales tax on everything is high, like about 16 -18 cents on every dollar spent. Jeffrey Zucker did not tell me that that each province is different. I see that he has mentioned that in a more recent comment.

          3. Regarding your accusation that I chastised Jeffrey Zucker, that is an objective way to look at my words. Many commenters and social scientists on-line ask for links or request supporting statements for their sentences (regarding their claims and arguments). They say “present your proof” or “where is your link.” It is very common and not rude nor thought of as chastising. We all look at things differently. It would be your freedom of speech to think that “my asking for proof” is a chastisement.

          4. the first chapter of my book states very clearly that I believe in capitalism. Our government in the US, right now, does not have pure capitalism. As far as I know, throughout the world, and since the earliest villages, city states, there has always been some regulation or semi-socialism. The taxes were collected in order to make the organization of so many people living closer together more managable. The ditches and pipes were built to make the water flow for drinking water and for sanitary resaons. The taxes were used to pay a treasurer and to pay the leader of a small village or town. In the US we call the leaders Mayors.

          3. When the US (Dept. of education and local school districts) regulates the schools to teach a certain curriculum, that is not pure capitalism. The people must adhere to rules to make sure that the children/students are learning in school. If there was not over-sight of the schools, our tax dollars could be wasted and the people we need to grow up and fill jobs to keep the nation thriving, would not happen without some regulation (or semi- socialism). Learning mathematics, how to write, read, etc. are needed. I know that the definition of socialism has to do with the economy (where the government has ownership of the businesses) but I see all of taxation as the earliest form of semi-socialism. A simple society such as tribe living remotely in a jungle has no tax. Some civilizations had no tax but they forced their people to work such as building pyramids or fighting in battles or wars.

          4. Whether you make any comments in the future is not a big deal. By the way, I have no idea which party you lean toward. That is a mystery.
          I just found this on wiki for “mayor” , “In several countries, where there is not local autonomy, mayors are often appointed by some branch of the federal or regional government. In some cities, subdivisions such as boroughs may have their own mayors; this is the case, for example, with the arrondissements of Paris, Montreal, and Mexico City.”

          5. I urge you to point out my “lack of knowledge statements.” We all make mistakes but you make a general statement with zero specifics. Generalizations mean nothing.

          I will have to look up arrondissement. I have no idea what the definiton is.


          1. It was my commentary to use the word Utopia to describe what is not in Canada. You should not be so vain as to think that I was going to use your words. Does one have to mimic the words of another to make a commentary of the other’s words? As the song goes, “It ain’t necessarily so.”


      2. I am living in Canada because of family issues not because I was fleeing the US. First of all, Health care up here is a province by province issue. There is no NATIONAL health care as some would think. Therefore the quality of health care varies from decent to terrible. Back when with my private health insurance in the US, mind you I was not anywhere near rich just self-employed, I could get any test that I needed from a CT scan to a treadmill test in less than a week. I had multiple providers from which to choose. Whether in BC or Alberta, the two provinces where I have lived, I and my wife have had to wait for months to get these more sophisticated tests.

        My wife needed open heart surgery. She was one of 41 patients in line to get a bed at the hospital over 40 miles from where we lived. We did not live in the boonies but in a bedroom community of Vancouver.

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.