Liberal free for all coming to an end

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

A huge corporation is not a synonym for evil. Corporations and small businesses are what drives our economy. Yes insurance companies make a profit, but so do doctors. They make a profit because someone has to manage the system that makes it possible for people to get medical treatment, and that someone provides a service. Is it disgusting that car mechanics make a profit off of other people's misfortunes? People are paid for the services they provide. If it was managed by the government then there would be no competition to keep prices low and to keep wasted spending to a manageable level. And again... we are maxed out in debt and cannot afford it. (Why does no one see that last sentence? Why is it completely irrelevant that there is a mountain of debt and all people can think of is what else to add to it?)

Life/health and a busted car are hardly equal.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Life/health and a busted car are hardly equal.

The principle is still the same though.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Life/health and a busted car are hardly equal.

You're right. I'd rather have a sinus infection than a cracked engine block. Yes some medical problems are more serious, but many are not.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

You're right. I'd rather have a sinus infection than a cracked engine block. Yes some medical problems are more serious, but many are not.

@AngryPostman: It is hardly the same principle. That is exactly what my comment was meant to demonstrate. That is to say: there is no real misery when a hunk of metal with wheels you use to move around breaks down. If, however, your wife or boyfriend or friend becomes sickly, dangerously so, there is misery. We shouldn't profit from misery. It reminds me of funeral parlors goading patrons into buying extravagant coffins and who knows what else for their dead family, using the heightened emotions of the patrons against them.

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?

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

@AngryPostman: It is hardly the same principle. That is exactly what my comment was meant to demonstrate. That is to say: there is no real misery when a hunk of metal with wheels you use to move around breaks down. If, however, your wife or boyfriend or friend becomes sickly, dangerously so, there is misery. We shouldn't profit from misery. It reminds me of funeral parlors goading patrons into buying extravagant coffins and who knows what else for their dead family, using the heightened emotions of the patrons against them.

Actually, the principle is the same. The examples are different but the action of buying a product from someone selling something is the same. The products may have different uses but you buying the services from an auto mechanic and you buying the services from an insurance company does not change the fact that you bought something from someone. Appealing to emotion does not change the the principle of the action.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

Actually, the principle is the same. The examples are different but the action of buying a product from someone selling something is the same. The products may have different uses but you buying the services from an auto mechanic and you buying the services from an insurance company does not change the fact that you bought something from someone. Appealing to emotion does not change the the principle of the action.

How can you possibly equate buying new shock absorbers to buying life-saving procedures? You may be buying in both cases, but to reduce it to merely the act of buying as opposed to taking its context into account is cold. It ignores the human.

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.

[Tread]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

If you think we do not care for anyone other than ourselves, look here. And that's just government contributions.

For someone who sets value on a reliable source, this link is not the best example, a Wikipedia article based on two sources, OECD and globalhumanitarianassistance.org which have an invalid link and are non existing page.

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.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

American individuals donated $226 billion in charities last year. It would take 3 Frenchmen, or 7 Germans, or 14 Italians to equal the charitable donations of 1 American.

On what is that based on? You could try to adorn yourself with borrowed plumes. If a few Bill Gates/Hollywood Stars donate huge amounts you can reach good statistics per citizen, but it says nothing about your social charity per citizen.
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?

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

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.

The same reason why our country is founded upon the basis of a constitutional republic and not a democracy, or why we have our legal system set up so that you are judged by a panel of your peers rather than being judged by the family or friends of whoever may have been wronged.

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.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

The same reason why our country is founded upon the basis of a constitutional republic and not a democracy, or why we have our legal system set up so that you are judged by a panel of your peers rather than being judged by the family or friends of whoever may have been wronged.

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.

We are a society of people, not robots. And I am speaking of positive emotions, not something like murder or other instances of injury.

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.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

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?

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?