|
Register | Forum Rules | Members List | Today's Posts | Search | Bookmark & Share |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#101
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Tracy: healthcare is about whatever serious health problems you may develop, not about something as easily dealt with as a sinus infection. You make light of health problems. Why? So as to avoid the matter of profiting from misery? |
#102
|
||||
|
||||
Well, aren't you the lucky one. Not everyone has such good fortune. But of course, this is America -- the one highly developed nation in the world where "social solidarity" is not just nearly non-existent, but where its opposite is taught to you from your first days in school. So, while we are all foolishly chasing the false "American dream" we've been taught about, and believing that the only righteous thing is to "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps," the rest of the developed world is surpassing the United States in every single category of social good, from literacy rates to birth rates to public transportation to educational achievement in math and science to ... the list is too endless for this site.
That crap we Americans were taught in school about individualism and making your own way and so on -- that serves a political and, more important, an economic purpose for those with the financial means -- in this country these days, typically acquired through economic activity that serves absolutely no productive purpose -- so that they never have to worry about paying for healthcare or relying on public transit or going to a decent public school or ... well, again, the list is too endless for this site. When I was in Paris once, I came upon a group of about 30 people protesting outside a neighborhood daycare center early one morning. The government was discussing cutting back the funding for the creche. I spoke with nearly everyone there, and I could find only 5 people who had kids in the daycare center. All the rest were there because they realized that everyone in France benefited from public-funded daycare, and that their neighbors -- and hence their neighborhood -- was enriched by the fact that the daycare center made it possible for some people to work where they might not otherwise be able to keep a job. When the saw the possibility of that benefit disappearing for a few, they realized that it would hurt them all. Last edited by smc; 11-09-2010 at 09:57 AM. |
#103
|
||||
|
||||
Humanity
Very well said SMC, humanity is in short supply in the good old USA. The conservatives are under the delusion that we can have a great country consisting of a few rich people and the rest working for them. Its not unlike the South before the Civil War. One of these days we will wake up, I hope it will not be too late.
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N. |
#104
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body Last edited by TracyCoxx; 11-09-2010 at 10:34 AM. |
#105
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
These people in France didn't feel burdened by taxes. People throughout Europe gladly pay for the social welfare systems they have. Denmark has enormously high taxes and, by nearly every scientific study, the most content and happy people in the developed world. Why? Because they enjoy lives absent from most of the financial stressors that make Americans unhappy (such as having to worry about paying for healthcare, or college, or whatever). The happiness of everyone around them turns into a generalized societal happiness. No one in France I've ever spoken to thinks of things as "entitlements" the way you use the word. They think of what we call "entitlements" in the United States as willing purchases they and their society have made for the good of all. That's why they protest so vehemently against changes in the social welfare system pushed by the wealthy. It's because they realize that the "individual liberty" that so many in America think Americans possess can be a catchphrase for something quite insidious. |
#106
|
||||
|
||||
I see the way language plays here. Entitlement is a bad word, full of negative connotations. It draws the image of an unruly child holding his parents to the fire for something he doesn’t need yet keeps demanding. But the same could not be said of something like healtchcare. This is something people need. And if sacrifices must be made to give the people something as vital as that, then why not? This is not insidious. It is a matter of compassion for the fellow man.
Language. Politicians have a way of screwing with it, people will not necessarily notice. For example, I was watching the news the other day and a pundit tried to rebut something someone else said by calling what the man proposed “class warfare.” They were speaking of raising taxes on the wealthy. This, as anyone can see with enough time, is spin. It is using, manipulating, language. It poisons the well because of its violent tones. Yet the rich get richer and the poor get poorer—and I will not apologize for using such a clich?d sentence, for it is true and gets the point across. If anyone is waging “warfare” it is not the poor or the middle class waging war on the rich, but the other way around. It is a case of the victimizers making themselves out to be victims. It reminds me of opponents of same-sex marriage and all that good stuff claiming that same-sex couples do not deserve marriage because they are asking for “special” rights. When it is, in fact, the opponents who are obliquely asking for special rights since they wish for the ability to get married to be cordoned off only for heterosexual couples. In both cases those who claim “class warfare” is being waged against the rich or that same-sex couples are asking for “special” rights are manipulating language. I remember wanting to tear at my scalp whenever I heard McCain spout his nonsense about “pulling oneself up by the bootstraps.” Tracy, you were born, fed and bred in a country that has no sense of community. No sense of solidarity. It is every man for himself. The cowboy is a national symbol! But no one can live by oneself. No man is an island. It is an illusion. Are we individuals? Yes. But being an individual is not about “me, me, me, me.” It is about growing. It is about knowing oneself. And from there, knowing others and loving others and caring for others. In your country, growing emotionally and intellectually and expressing that love is too often cause for discomfort. I know this. I lived in the United States for five years and learned this lesson quite well. And I was hurt over and again because I knew I could not truly be myself with most of the populace. I had to live, so to speak, in the closet. You live in tiny rooms, in insulated houses, in suburbs, where no one knows your name. Rather than in the light, outside, amongst friends and family on whom to depend and whom to love. To depend is not a bad thing. We need other people and we need help. It is the human condition. But in your country, to depend on anything is seen as a bad thing. And the powers that be depend on you thinking so, so that, as SMC put it, they never have to contribute. So that they never have to sacrifice. Living instead off us to an extent, in total disregard of everyone the rest of the time. The idea that they should never sacrifice or that they do no wrong, that they are the economic engine of your country and therefore deserve all they make, is an idea better left to disappear into the wind. A fiction, and quite a fiction it is. I do not like the near-reverent tones of many people when they speak of “the free market.” They sound like proselytizers. The invisible hand of the free market… Much like a god behind all, an invisible arbiter. I do not know your background Tracy. But I cannot help thinking that you were well taken care of when you were younger. That your parents had the means for ___ (whatever means those were for whatever you needed). Yet that is not the case for everyone. It is easy to say things like “pulling by one’s bootstraps” when you do have bootstraps and they are fine leather or some other material whose integrity has not been compromised. It is another when you are poor and live in a terrible neighborhood. It is not so easy to move up socially. It can take generations, when it could be made to much easier. Why shouldn’t we have such things as national healthcare where all are covered, and people need not worry about how to pay for college, and instead need only prepare the boxes and the car and send your child off to study? We shouldn’t have to drown ourselves in debt for these things and then get drowned in grief and depression over what that debt could do to us. These things should be our birthright—never to be taken for granted, always fought for, always to be cherished. Often when I hear opposition to such things as a system where all are given healthcare or supplying higher education, it does not seem to truly be about financial concerns, but about disregard for anyone other than oneself. Is this the case with you? Or could I rest easy knowing it is not so? You say that now is not the time for something like healthcare reform—yet when will it be the time? I read such a thing from you and I cannot help thinking that it is but a stalling tactic, much as others have done for a decade now concerning allowing homosexuals into the army. Now is not the time, yet when there is relative peace there is still opposition. When will it be the time? |
#107
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#108
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#109
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#110
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Assuming that the collection of taxes by the federal government to fund anything other than defense and regulation of our currency violates the constitution, what part of federal government spending do you propose to do away with? Interstate highways? Biomedical research? Public school aid? The air traffic control system? Financial aid for college tuition? Preservation of national parks? Maintaining the Library of Congress? Should Medicare be shut down, immediately? ... |
#111
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N. |
#112
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#113
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, these are essentially the same thing. Because in America, there is no more a fundamental right to transportation than there is a fundamental right to health care. If your car breaks down and you don't have the money to fix it...You're up shits creek without a paddle. If you have a life-threatening illness and don't have the money/insurance to pay for treatment...You are also out of luck.
And since health care reform is SOOOO expensive, need I remind everyone that America has the highest per capita cost of healthcare of ANY nation in the world, and for far worse outcomes. The statistics would suggest that a single-payer system would actually be far cheaper than the "for profit" model of insurance that we currently have. By removing administrative overlap of multiple insurers, not to mention the egregious CEO salaries, and the billions of dollars of dividends that are paid to shareholders...And you take BILLIONS of dollars out of health care cost. Yes, you "pay" a wage to a doctor for his services. And yes, the doctor must "profit" enough from his procedures to pay his secretary, his staff, and his overhead. But a doctor need not "profit" so much as to make millions of dollars of salary (like a corporate CEO) nor to pay dividends (as corporations do). I find it funny to hear people say that we can't afford health care reform. Personally, I think we can't afford NOT to reform health care. The current bill was far from perfect, and lacked a lot of cost-containment measures. But according to the only record keeper that really matters (the non-partisan CBO), the current effort at health care reform actually shaves roughly $138 billion from the deficit over ten years. It's also highly disingenous to suggest that "85% of people are happy with their insurance." It's more appropriate to say that a large percentage of people don't want to have to sacrifice their quality of care for a substandard type of care. Nevermind that many people with insurance are underinsured. MANY people who called for health care reform believe that the legislation did not go far enough...Far more than 15% that Tracy would suggest. Because the fact of the matter is, not EVERYONE in this country believes that a broken down car and life-threatening illness should be the same thing. Some of us believe that health care should be a right. |
#114
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I've never heard of a convincing argument for the libertarian's diet though. I mean, surely libertarians object to the federal beauracracy which inspects meat, vegetables, and food products for safety. I suppose they'd rather live somewhere like China where such inspections rarely if ever happen. Contaminants regularly work their way into the Chinese food supply. And then we get to see the "free market" work it's magic. Thousands of people get sick, and perhaps thousands die. Then the benevolent "free market" punishes the businesses which were lax in their regulation. But it takes THOUSANDS of people getting sick for action to take place. I don't know about you, but me...I prefer a diet where we try to catch instances of contamination BEFORE thousands of people have to get sick and die. But I'm sure libertarians would prefer less intrusion into their diet. I'm sure libertarians wouldn't mind if it was their child that died from melanine-tainted milk...Afterall, principles before personal attachments. Their child's death would be one of the cogs in the pseudo-magical "free market." I guess some libertarians would prefer a "states' rights" approach. I guess they'd settle for a disparate patchwork of regulation that differs between all 50 states. So some states may have safer food than others. Me...I'm glad for the federal standards. I'm glad that our Supreme Court hasn't so narrowly interpretted the Constitution to limit the federal government to 17 duties. Because quite frankly...The libertarian diet sucks. For that matter, much of the libertarian worldview sucks...A world where there is no safety net...Where the starving are literally left to die in the streets. Of course, without welfare, some of these same libertarians couldn't complain when the peasants rise out of their shackles and take by force what the rich hoarde to themselves. Afterall, the government has no business protecting people's wealth either. It's a harsh, dog-eat-dog world. |
#115
|
||||
|
||||
I'm always very curious to engage conservatives in conversations about what they value. I mean, supposedly they value low taxes but also value fiscal accountability. The two don't really go hand-in-hand.
Republicans say they want to roll back discretionary spending...Great! That only accounts for roughly 15% of all federal spending. Republicans say they don't want to cut defense spending, even though it has been our involvement in two wars which has contributed greatly to our deficit. And Republicans say they want to make permanent the Bush tax cuts...Even though these same tax cuts make up 55% of our deficit. Sounds to me like they want to have their cake and eat it too. I mean, I don't see it being fiscally responsible to make tax cuts part of your policy, when those same tax cuts are responsible for the vast majority of the deficit. Can someone explain this mystery to me? |
#116
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If you're so against Social Security, are you going to collect when you retire? Sure, the government has been extracting some money out of your paycheck to cover your later draw, but on a principled basis shouldn't you refuse the payback? |
#117
|
||||
|
||||
Why is healthcare a right? Shouldn't it be the right of a person to eat healthy and stay fit? Aside from the odd freak accident, alot of health problems can be averted by simple oversight of ones habits. You have the ability to exercise and you have the ability to stuff your face with twinkies until you become a bloated lard with diabeetus and numerous other health problems. If you choose one, you will have to deal with the consequences regardless of the outcome, whether it is good or bad. All these social welfare programs do is absolve those who make bad descisions of their personal responsibilities and pass the buck onto someone else.
I don't know about you but I don't like having money pulled from my paycheck to fund some lazy EBT using asshole and their horrible eating habits just so they can eat themselves into a hospital bed and/or a casket. I should not be responsible for someones well being unless I choose to do so.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#118
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Just because I'm telling you this story doesn't mean that I'm alive at the end of it. If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. DEO VINDICE |
#119
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You are correct that many libertarians are anti-government. Governments always become despotic and oppressive and will use every tool in the book to expand their power including appealing to the "working man" to get their way. Lenin and his Bullshitvik party along with the thought process of Karl Marx appealed to the "working man" to gain control, even though they were a bunch of acedemic buddy fuckers who had never done a days work in their life and look how having a government that provided everything a person needed worked out for them. I am for limited government GRH, not living in China. Do not confuse the two. Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-09-2010 at 08:07 PM. |
#120
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I will not collect Social Security when I retire. I am 24 right now and by the time I am eligible to collect, there will be no more Social Security funds to draw from. Anyone who thinks about it will realize that Social Security is a massize ponzi scheme and if anyone has been paying attention to the news as of late will know that they are already denying people their SS payments because there is not enough money to keep it funded. Good luck gettin yours. If I didn't have my money taken away from me by the fed, I wouldn't have to even worry about getting back what I put in. I can fare better if I had the money that is deducted from my pay and put into Social Security put into a Roth IRA instead. http://arthurshall.com/x_social_security.shtml http://arthurshall.com/x_2010_social_security.shtml Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-09-2010 at 08:29 PM. |
#121
|
||||
|
||||
I didn't say they were all minor, just a lot of health issues are. For the health issues that are minor like a sinus infection and less of a pain to deal with than repairing your car, is it ok in your mind for insurance companies to profit from getting your doctor paid?
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#122
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But the fact is we are facing collapse of the US dollar. When the US government spends $trillions on stimulus packages, that's not our money. That's other countries money like China, and we do it without considering their reaction. Isn't that a bit arrogant? Then on top of that we add the national health care program. There's another $trillion... surely the Chinese won't mind another trillion. How long can this last?
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body Last edited by TracyCoxx; 11-09-2010 at 11:57 PM. |
#123
|
||||
|
||||
Speaking of bashing America, here's a pretty good article from one Canadian reporter in 1973 that had enough of it.
Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#124
|
||||
|
||||
Humor us. Instead of dodging the real question that I asked, assume there are funds available when you retire. Now answer.
|
#125
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
No one can live alone. It is not possible. To live alone is to invite insanity. You don't hunt your own food. You're not a hermit and neither should you desire to be one. When you go to the supermarket you're depending on someone. When you go to the movie theater alone you're still depending on someone. Fractured as society in the US may be, have you noticed how you still clump together into areas? You may not speak to one another but you still live close to others. It's a little part of the gregarious animal in you expressing its natural/biological/evolutionary urge to live in groups, suffused in meaningful social interaction and validation--a little part of the gregarious animal expressing itself even when mired in bullshit like suburbs and the nuclear unit and the rending of ties after something like highschool. Why shouldn't I appeal to emotion? I am not here blathering a la Glenn Beck. To remove compassion from any area of the human experience--and EVERYTHING is a part of the human experience--is a recipe for disaster. Last edited by Enoch Root; 11-10-2010 at 09:53 AM. |
#126
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
According to OECD the USA gave total the most because they have the most citizens. You take place 19 by percentage of GNI. Place 19 from 23 member counties isn?t that good. Quote:
You try to show how charitable and social the USA and it citizens are and base it on maybe a few amply individual donations. Then you say how many foreigner it would take to equal 1 American donation. Isn't that a bit arrogant? |
#127
|
||||
|
||||
Strawman, much?
|
#128
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The people who originally put into Social Security are withdrawing more than they put in. This is something that will not be able to continue for long. Why do you put so much faith in programs that are obvious wealth redistribution and have not provided much in return compared to the amount that is put into them? Social Security, welfare and all these other programs do not induce economic productivity. All they create is dependance on someone (namely the Fed) and punish the people who actually work and put into the system by forcing them to cover the costs. So why are you so adamant about programs that spend your money once it is taken away from you and then promise some of it back when you are near death?
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-10-2010 at 02:19 PM. |
#129
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Emotion clouds judgement and when you react to situation based on emotion, you tend to overlook certain important elements that would have been noticed and properly addressed with cold, rational thought. People are alot more easily manipulated when in an emotional state rather than when they are able to think clearly. If you were able to avenge every percieved wrong brought against you versus any actual wrong, you would not know truth from lie. Distancing yourself from a problem, being able to get all the facts first and making an informed decision as opposed flying off the bat at every problem that evoked an emotional response is actually adding the "human element", as you put it, to a problem. Animals make decisions based on their emotions and can go from Ahab to Arab in the blink of an eye. They do not have the governer in place that allows them the faculties for rational thought. "Homo Sapien", it means "Smart Man." We are smart creatures. Our ability for rational thought and looking at a problem objectively is what makes us greater than animals, so if anything, adding emotion to our decisions is adding an "animalistic element" which has proven itself time and time again to be a recipie for disaster and does not allow for advancement as a people. That is why problems that have such huge gravity (like laws and programs or decisions of life and death over people) that affect a multitude of people must not be taken lightly and must be scrutinized to the smallest detail, rather than based off of an emotional response.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-10-2010 at 01:58 PM. |
#130
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You are more than welcome to make your arguments, but I would appreciate it if you didn't ascribe to me things I did not write. When I express my specific opinion about U.S. government programs, there will be no mistaking it. |
#131
|
||||||
|
||||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And yes, obviously you do support these programs to some degree, otherwise you would not have been pestering me about what I would do and trying to turn it into what I think about this or that. I have made myself pretty clear in my past posts in other threads about my stance on such things. If you are curious, I advise you to reread my previous posts.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-10-2010 at 03:50 PM. |
#132
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This is insulting. You ascribed to me things I never stated. It has nothing to do with whether I like your answer. Quote where I said what you ascribe to me, or acknowledge that you put words in my mouth. |
#133
|
||||
|
||||
I already explained my reasons for my response. If you were truly interested in what programs I would cut, we would not be having this discussion right now as it would have sufficed. By turning the direction of the discussion into whether or not I personally would draw Social Security (which has nothing to do with me wanting to cut the program), you invited the response that you got.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#134
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Since Social Security is the only one you mentioned that I could safely assume has a direct impact on you (i.e., I assume you're not on welfare, and you mention no others by name), I legitimately asked you about your personal relationship with drawing said Social Security -- based on your principled position in opposition to its existence. It was a completely legitimate question in the context of this discussion. By the way, no one has answered my specific question about which programs to cut. Now you reserve for yourself the right to attribute to me statements I did not make because you don't like that I asked you the question. The bottom line here, Postman, is that you put words in my mouth. I did not do that to you. You have now written more than one post trying to evade your fundamental violation of one of the tenets of legitimate and fair discourse, which is that everyone gets to state his or her opinion, not have it stated by someone else. You owe me an apology, but more important you owe it to the Forum to have this discussion without putting words in ANYONE'S mouth. |
#135
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You draw a false line between the human and the animal. It is one and the same. Love and compassion are just as necessary and good, if not greater, than "objective thought." Love is not the greater of sex. "I believe a leaf is no less than the journey-work of the stars." Do you understand? What is the point of banding together as a species and creating policy, if not to make our lives better? To desire my family or friends or neighbors to be hale and hearty is utterly reasonable and utterly human. That everyone is manipulated by the insurance companies and that this is an injustice is no imagined wrong. I have never understood the continued disregard and devaluing of the emotions amongst you Americans. You bristle at that which is good, you bristle at the senses and at passion. It is Puritanical and outdated and should have died with the Mayflower. This is all the more ironic given the nature of this forum. The only emotion, the only passion you are good at and respond to, is that which is associated with fear. Glenn Beck sounding the trumpet of the ride of the Horsemen. The Trinity of reasoned discourse: logos, ethos, pathos. I will not apologize for appealing to the emotions. It is an honored element of discussion. Any argument that does not attempt to address all three (reasoning, credibility of the speaker, and emotion) is an incomplete argument. |
#136
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And yes, I have answered your questions about which programs to cut. You never asked why or anything else, you just asked what programs we would cut. And no, I did not put words in your mouth. If you you are as indifferent to such programs as you have stated or oppose them like I do, my feelings about the subject would have been implied and it would have unnecessary to ask such questions. You came across with an aire of defensiveness and preference towards such welfare programs and I took it as such. You have said before that it is up to the writer to be understood and had you made the effort to get across to me that you were purely interested in my opinion and said something like "I do not understand Angry Postman. Could you please clarify?" or something to the effect, rather than saying things like "Answer now!", perhaps I may have obliged you in a kinder manner.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#137
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, I defy you to prove your point, with quotes, that I expressed "defensiveness and preference" regarding welfare programs. I wrote about the notion of "social solidarity" and used such programs as an example. I've quote you again and again in this discourse, but thus far you have failed to provide a single quote to back up your characterizations of HOW I have engaged in the discourse. I don't know how else to explain this, so I apologize in advance for the analogy I am about to use. It is used only because I am at a loss for any other way to make my point. I teach at a university. All of my students are PhD students. We have seminars in which there is very heated discourse. Let's imagine that the interaction you and I have been having on this site took place at my university in a classroom. Further assume, as is the case, that there is an accepted rule that professors and students are equals in seminars -- that is, there is no formal hierarchy, and any informal hierarchy is seriously frowned upon. I have absolutely not doubt that if the full record of our interactions were put before an independent body of students and professors serving as a commission of inquiry, that you would be found to have violated the standards for legitimate discourse. I am so certain of this that I would bet my career on it. Now, before you dismiss this with some vitriol about liberal academia, I should point out that I am referring to my principal appointment at the university, which happens to be in the Management school -- hardly a bastion of liberalism, no matter what else the rest of my institution, or any other one for that matter, might be. Last edited by smc; 11-10-2010 at 06:06 PM. |
#138
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Saying that people need such a program is inherently arrogant and condescending. You are in effect saying that you know what people need more than the people themselves. If you truly claim to care about others, then why do you wish to take away their ability to choose what is best for them? What works for you may not work for them and blanket policies like that just do not work. People do not have to use insurance companies because there are other places to get medical care at other than the hospital. There are places like US HealthWorks and other businessess that will do quality jobs for cheap and they tell you how much it will cost up front. I've had quality dental work and minor surgeries for about a 10th of the cost of what it would have cost with an insurance company.. I am perfectly happy with what I have and I don't need the federal gov. to take from me to fund crappier quality healthcare. If people wish to be charitable, let them. Do not force them to be charitable by using the federal government to take money from them. Instituting programs like that only keep people from realizing the consequences of their haphazard ways. Getting rid of social safety nets will force people to be responsible and will help them realize the long term effects of their actions and help them plan accordingly. And no, fear is not the only emotion I respond to. Like I said, I keep my emotions in check and I try to look at a problem objectively. That doesn't mean I am a cold hearted bastard; I do feel and I am aware of the impact my actions can have and act accordingly. I do love people as well, I am just not the type who wishes to impoverish the many for the benefit of the few. I feel that if you stop holding people by the hand and let them make decisions by themselves, people will for the most part make choices that have positive effects.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#139
|
||||
|
||||
smc and I now have settled our diffferences, misunderstandings and will now go paint the town red. It's either that or get drunk and light some shit on fire.
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#140
|
||||
|
||||
Umm, what's that campfire song? Hosanna? I guess? Am I getting this right?
What does that mean, painting the town red? Last edited by Enoch Root; 11-11-2010 at 10:37 AM. |
#141
|
||||
|
||||
Would you like to share cock and bull stories?
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N. |
#142
|
||||
|
||||
How about cock and ass stories?
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. |
#143
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Financial aid is a good thing, but there's a problem with it... When colleges see that students are getting financial aid, they see that as an ok to raise their tuition. Biomedical research should be funded. There should be public school aid because there should be national standards in education. Air traffic control system? Of course. National parks should definitely be preserved and protected against republicans. Maintaining the Library of Congress? Sure, why not. Medicare? I'm not up on medicare, but probably. Quote:
Quote:
I was forced in to paying into SS rather than putting that money into investments. Since I will still need that money for retirement and the government has forced that money to be in the form of SS, I have no other choice but to use it.
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#144
|
||||
|
||||
I have raised a valid point. A large part of our health problems are caused by what we eat and how we care for ourselves. This is entirely within our control. 25% of what you eat keeps you alive. The rest of what you eat keeps your doctor alive.
Dodge questions much? Please answer the question. Should my taxes go to pay for someones triple heart bypass surgery when they have trashed their own arteries?
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#145
|
||||
|
||||
Ok, it's getting deep in here. How bout a round for everyone
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body |
#146
|
||||
|
||||
Hey great! Are us California wackos included? How about bringing in some hot shemales for a little R and R. I could fly to Texas for that.
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N. |
#147
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It means to engage in some sort of spree, originally riotous and bloody (hence the "red") but over time to mean go out at night, around town, and hit all the top spots, drinking, cavorting, carousing, and so on. One origin of the phrase is said to come from the 1830s when a group of friends ran around a town somewhere in Leicestershire, England (I can't remember exactly), late a night, and painted a whole bunch of buildings red. Another is the "Spring Heeled Jack" legend of England, which is linked to Henry de la Poer Beresford, a notorious hooligan who, while at Oxford University, used to cause a lot of mayhem. It included literally upsetting apple-carts, breaking windows, and painting the heels of a parson's horse with aniseed (which would come out red). Last edited by smc; 11-11-2010 at 03:04 PM. Reason: Fixed typo. |
#148
|
||||
|
||||
Tracy, I really, really appreciate your thoughtful answer to my questions. Despite what some may think, I am genuinely interested in a rational discourse about these issues. I want to make clear that I am not a liberal; my own political/economic positions put me way outside of the sphere in which liberals are typically situated. I confess to a lack of understanding of where conservatives and libertarians are coming from, outside of what often seems to be a reaction against change, because it seems as if many positions from the conservative and libertarian perspective run contrary to the economic interests of those who profess them, and in fact serve the interests of others in a class the conservative and libertarian can never hope to attain. That is why I really do appreciate real answers to real questions.
That said, I would like to explore your answers a bit more, and pose some additional questions. Quote:
I have never heard of a causal relationship of the sort you describe. Typically, schools increase tuition because of cutbacks (in the case of public universities) or cost increases (in the case of private institutions), and they typically do not cut back financial aid -- much of which comes via the federal government -- when they increase tuition. What makes biomedical research different than anything else with respect to whether the federal government or states should be the funders? Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean by "liberal policies" -- perhaps you mean with respect to social issues. But putting that aside, let's look at regulation. Conservatives and libertarians often decry regulation, but it seems to me that there are some types of regulation that must either be established at the federal level or not exist at all. Food safety is an example, and here is a made-up scenario to illustrate my point. Arkansas allows chicken farms to feed their stock with something that is known to be somewhat toxic in humans, while Georgia forbids this. Arkansas chicken producers do not provide any label indicating what the chickens are fed, while Georgia producers are required to by state regulation. Even for those who argue "states' rights" here, there is obviously a problem so long as we have cross-state markets. So, do we get rid of all the regulation, or do we get rid of the "united states" and let states negotiate trade agreements with each other that include tariffs dictating things like labels, etc.? How would you handle such a situation. Thanks again for your answers. |
#149
|
||||
|
||||
Someone questioned my post about the origins of "paint the town red," so I thought I'd offer another answer. This comes from one of my favorite books: Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins, by William and Mary Morris, published in 1962:
"This colorful term for a wild spree, especially one involving much drinking, probably originated in the frontier. In the nineteenth century the section of town where brothels and saloons were located was known as the 'red light district.' So a group of lusty cowhands out for a 'night on the town' might very well take it into their heads to make the whole town red." Personally, I think Mr. and Mrs. Morris are wrong, since the earliest known appearance of the term "red light district" dates from 1894. |
#150
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I am happy with things like food safety regulations but alot of times when there is federal involvement it usually goes from equality of opportunity where there is a level playing field and people are free to make whatever of the opportunities given to them , to determining the outcome for everyone. It is when the fed starts determining the outcome for everyone through programs is when things start becoming problematic. When things are localized, there is more responsibility placed on the individual entities and people. Things become alot more apparent upon a closer view than when looked upon with a broader view. States and even individual cities have proven themselves capable of balancing budgets and funding programs that accomplish the same if not more than the Federal Government. Why then should the individual states not be able to determine things locally? The problem that alot of libertarian or conservative types is not the programs themselves but the concentration of power at the highest levels and programs like those are more often than not just a way to increase power. History has proven that when there is a concentration or centralization of power, the likelyhood of corruption and favoritism exponentially increases. The reasoning for states rights is the same reason why businessess have a board of directors rather than one guy calling the shots. At higher levels where there is less familiarity with the people and what they are actually doing, the more potential there is for abuse. When you keep things at a lower level and more spread out, there is alot more responsibility placed on the individuals. If there is a program such as Social Security or Obamacare that voluntarily allows for me to put in my money, I am all for it. Unfortunately, especially at the federal level, it no longer becomes voluntary and becomes mandatory. If people want to voluntarily put money into a program, let them. Do not threaten them with jail time or fines or increased taxes because they do not want part of your healthcare or whatever program is being pitched. I am not saying get rid of all the regulation, just get rid of the ones that don't fall within the scope of the powers of the federal government. If states want to regulate commerce between themselves, let them determine their policies. The one-size-fits-all mentality of the fed will only benefit those who can fit in that certain "size" so to speak and only determines outcome instead of opportunity. The thing that people don't get is that by having a blanket policy of universal healthcare, you do not get Mayo clinic treatment; you get something more along the lines of Soviet Union-esque treatment. There is a saying within the federal government and the military of "Made by the lowest bidder." If that type of policy is rampant among federal institutions, and I ask people honestly, what makes you think that "universal healthcare" would be any different. What is to stop them from handing you Ibuprofen for all your medical ailments and then telling you to go kick rocks? Afterall, they did give you treatement for your medical condition right? Beware what you wish for because you just may get it. There is no checks and balances with federal policies, once instituted you would have a better chance turning lead into gold than getting a policy or program rescinded. Governments are never known for their ability to limit their powers, only their expansion. Just because it is well intentioned does not mean there is possibility for abuse. Quote:
__________________
*More posts than Bionca* [QUOTE=God(from Futurama)]Right and wrong are just words; what matters is what you do... If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. Last edited by The Conquistador; 11-11-2010 at 04:54 PM. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Giselly (Giselle) Lins -- another angel meets a violent end. | seanchai | In Memoriam | 10 | 08-19-2012 05:51 PM |
The Second Coming of Keliana | ila | Freebies | 9 | 12-24-2011 11:39 AM |
Absolutely gorgeous hottie asian with cumshot at end | schiff | ID help needed | 2 | 06-07-2010 12:20 PM |
Coming out | guest | Chat About Shemales | 3 | 03-15-2009 03:22 PM |
Coming out | Kendra | Chat About Shemales | 1 | 03-02-2009 05:10 PM |