Remind me why the US can't do this...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

On the morning of May 29 my group was taken to see the village of Cha’an outside Dalian. Or perhaps I should say the former village. What happened, essentially, is that back in 2006 the former “village” of rudimentary structures was razed and the government constructed a large and extremely nice park (it’s in a very scenic area), reforested the hillsides, and constructed a series of apartment complexes. The former villagers now live in modest but up-to-date structures. You see some stories of Chinese people being serious dispossessed in this kind of process, but in the case of Cha’an the local authorities seem to have decided (wisely, in my view, as well as fairly) that it doesn’t make sense to treat people poorly. So people who lost homes in the reconstruction were compensated with multiple homes in the new Cha’an.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/05/land-prices-and-the-chinese-public-sector.php

[SheilaT]

1. For one thing, imagine the outcry

on the part of Republicans.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. Remind me why democrats listen to Republicans

They were elected for NOT being Republicans IIRC.

just sayin'

[msongs]

3. no no, we must be bipartisan because then repubs will love and go along with us lolol. nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

4. I'M CONVINCED!

no

not really

[SheilaT]

12. Ahh, that came across wrong.

I don't mean that we should actually listen to them. I mean that the screams and invocations of WELFARE STATE!!!! if we did something like that would be something to behold. And behear.

I also mean that the very sense of self-sufficiency that on one hand is a good and important part of this country is also the attitude that makes so many reluctant to help others. You see it in the bogus claims about Welfare Queens, and the notion that everyone could have a good job and there's no excuse whatsoever for not having one, and health care isn't a right but a privilege that goes along with the right sort of employment.

The underlying attitude that's in the Chinese government's giving those displace residents multiple homes is almost completely alien to Americans. But I know I'm preaching to the choir here.

[CanSocDem]

5. Could be...

...because capitalism doesn't contribute to the common good.

.

[treestar]

6. Because of the Constitution and the Law

It would have to be a project that passed Congress.

Mussolini made the trains run on time, as they say. sure they can do some things easier and more efficiently, but what price do they pay for that?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. I'm not picking a fight but...

...must *everything* descend into fascist/communist analogies?

It's absolutely ridiculous when RWers make comparisons to what American progressives are trying to accomplish by calling it akin to the bastardization perpetrated by the USSR. Such a system would require a massive and oppressive military subjugating its own people--BUT--US soldiers are not those kinds of people--AND--the RWers will be the first to tell you that.

[melm00se]

9. it's the fine balance

that government must walk and the trade offs that occur in a society and what can happen when something macro is sacrificed for micro issue gain and extremes showcase the issue quite clearly.

While the Constitution does allow for the attachment of private property but only with just compensation and city/states can exercise under that power via their ability of eminent domain.

However, when this happens, the aggrieved people can (and usually do) exercise their 1st amendment rights and petition the government for redress (IOW sue) and the costs quickly spiral out of control.

I doubt that China has such a process. China is, for most intents and purposes, an authoritarian/totalitarian state, politically akin to the Cold War era USSR (single party, no significant, if any, opposition party).

[treestar]

10. But it still can't be done, because we live under the rule of law

and that is not a bad thing. It may be easier for the Chinese government to accomplish a desirable thing, since they don't have to deal with something as messy as Congress. but it also lets them do undesirable things more easily, too.

And that is the reason why we can't do that in the U.S., though it sounds like a good thing.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. First of all...

...I owe you an apology.

I got so reflexive over the fascist analogy I neglected to address your larger point.

If you will be kind enough to overlook my outburst:

We were told leading up to the passage of healthcare reform that it was unconstitutional but the general welfare and commerce clauses seem to refute this.

Now, if the weak-sauce law that is the present HCR package can pass why not something that actually has substance?

Surely, (or Shirley, as the case may be) the case can be made: how can we be a nation that provides healthcare but then sends hundreds of thousands if not millions of those patients back into sub-standard housing if not outright homelessness?

What would be the GOP's retort: take 2 aspirin and go back to your refrigerator box under the bridge?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. self-delete

silly double posts