Sick Medical Care
Good, perhaps you can take that drive and push it towards non-profit efforts to help people.
Ok, well, in many ways it isn't like murder. For instance, in this case we are omitting to do something. Not only that, but to avoid your notion of murder, we don't even need to have a universal health care system, we only need to have health care stipends or some other notion that allows for catastrophic health insurance of some form or another.
I don't see the notion as being blind faith though, to be honest, you should be willing to assert your will in any case. To be honest, that is your choice, however, I think most would agree that serial killers and terrorists are significantly more psychotic, and leave most people more displeased than health insurance does.
Oh, we can afford a lot actually, but affording a lot does not mean we should do the things we can afford to do in all cases. The issue is proper justification, and you drown a lot of this out with your ardent moral claims.
Ok, the whole "drug issue" has been addressed multiple times by now. It really is no longer much of an issue as the phenomenon has been dealt with before.
So, basically, the government has unlimited power under your view? Not to degenerate this into a Godwin, but didn't you just justify fascism in that one little paragraph? I mean, the Nazi party was very popular, and it was loved by the people but it did terrible things that few people could ever accept. I really do not think I can accept a government that exists for power rather than liberty, and I would sooner remove the government than forfeit that liberty.
MR_BOGAN
Veteran
Joined: 5 Mar 2008
Age: 126
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,479
Location: The great trailer park in the sky!
The US certainly pays too much for the military.
The role of government in society is something that there is considerable question over. I mean, there are multiple notions of what the government is called to do or not to do, and a number of conflicts over that.
The issue that the government is supposed to be a total representative of the people though, I am not sure I believe that. Let's just take that logic over to the social issues, let's say that the people in a society decide that homosexuality is a terrible sin, should the government then start punishing homosexuals by publicly flogging them and then locking them away? Let's say that the people believe that Catholicism is a crime against humanity, should we then start executing Catholics? I'd say the answer to both questions happens to be no, and in the 2nd case, most nation's constitutions would certainly disagree. The fact of the matter is that the ideology that our society is based upon is not a simple notion of democratic authoritarianism where "the people" being 27% of the populace decide what 100% of the people including the disagreeing 26% and the apathetic 47% of the people end up doing. It is based upon the notion of liberality, which is a neutrality towards human beings and their choices. That is why we have freedom of speech, that is why we have freedom of religion, that is why the US opted towards a more federal system. Simple notions of democratic rule simply lead to a tyranny of the majority, rather than a legitimate freedom. The fact of the matter is that if the government doesn't do something, that is because the government is meant to have limits, not that the people are or are not anything.
Well in New Zealand people vote for what government they want. We have freedom of speech freedom of religion. We have free health care for everybody
Not sure how it works in the US from your description.
Do you know how much it costs to buy HIV drugs in the UK?? Its around 10 dollars same with cancer drugs.
According to the World Health Organization, Cuba provides a doctor for every 170 residents,[31] and has the second highest doctor to patient ratio in the world after Italy.[32] All fiscal and administrative aspects of health care in Cuba are run by the state; no private hospitals or clinics are permitted, and medical workers are required to work for the state. Historically, Cuba has long ranked high in numbers of medical personnel; in 1957, before the revolution, it ranked third in Latin America and ahead of many European nations. Medical professionals are not paid high salaries by national or international standards. In 2002 the mean monthly salary was 261 pesos, thus 1.5 times the national mean.[33] A doctor’s salary in the late 1990s was equivalent to about US$15-20 per month in purchasing power. Therefore, many prefer to work in different occupations, generally in the lucrative tourist industry (e.g. taxi drivers), where earnings could be 50 to 60 times more.[12]
I have already stated that Western Europe has it going on. But agian, small countries with well established systems...I have trouble with the comparison.
There go the stones again. I cannot help but wonder if you have a job.
As for the military...I support the US military and our troops. I thank them for risking their lives so I may be safe.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
MR_BOGAN
Veteran
Joined: 5 Mar 2008
Age: 126
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,479
Location: The great trailer park in the sky!
As for the military...I support the US military and our troops. I thank them for risking their lives so I may be safe.
They have actually made the world more unsafe for Americans. There is a lot of ill feeling towards americans all over the world now for what they did in Iraq.
If you travel it is a good idea to say you are Canadian.
Not what I was arguing MR BOGAN, but that is alright, I did not expect most people to get my point. The actual point was "then that is what the people as a whole want." is based upon a false notion of government. Part of this argument is on the workings of a health care system, and part of this debate is on the philosophy of government. The former is merely economics. The latter is a matter of morality, and the role of government within society, and in the latter, I am taking a very libertarian stance to notions of society and the role of government.
I think some confusion has resulted from issues of trying to set up the terms of the latter debate. Most people do not conceive political debate in very philosophical terms, which is why it results in screaming.
As for the military...I support the US military and our troops. I thank them for risking their lives so I may be safe.
They have actually made the world more unsafe for Americans. There is a lot of ill feeling towards americans all over the world now for what they did in Iraq.
If you travel it is a good idea to say you are Canadian.
I agree the US screwed up and made the US a prime target for attack thanks so much for upping the risk for oh I don't know a nuke being dropped in New York City
By the way I support the troops but I don't support the wars. War is when people are too stupid to talk things out so they kill instead to make people bow down to their wishes and demands.
It goes back to what it was meant to be? Well, the government was not even meant to be democratic. It was instead meant to ensure the liberty of the people. I mean, in the declaration of independence it was openly stated that the purpose of government was "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness", and the latter probably would have been "property" if there weren't so many issues involved with putting "property" in there. The reason I say that is because the drafters of the Constitution were generally big fans of John Locke, who is known for his justifications of property and support of it. Generally, the framers did not trust the people, which is why we have the electoral college, so obviously they viewed the government not as a democratic institution, but rather an institution with certain goals, and part of the debate is over the proper scope of these goals.
Strapples
Supporting Member
Joined: 30 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,861
Location: Chicago Area IL (FAR FROM AUTISM SPEAKS)
Why should the people in guantanamo bay get better treatment than me??? They have the blood of the innocent on their hand I do not, I mean WTF they are evil or so they say and they are getting the royal treatment.
In case anyone is wondering I just watched that movie Sicko.
I agree on every point you mentioned.
We spent over $40,000 yes... i typed that correctly FOURTY THOUSAND dollars. JUST THIS YEAR ON MY HEALTHCARE ALONE!
_________________
check out my website at {redacted by admin - domain taken over and points to a porn site}
When in doubt, ask an autistic. Chances are, they're obsessed with what you need to know.
Autism Speaks will NEVER speak for me
CLASSIC AUTISM
As for the military...I support the US military and our troops. I thank them for risking their lives so I may be safe.
They have actually made the world more unsafe for Americans. There is a lot of ill feeling towards americans all over the world now for what they did in Iraq.
If you travel it is a good idea to say you are Canadian.
I am aware of the world's views of Americans and do not necessarily *agree* with US military action in Iraq. Actually, I just read a book about the medical complicity of US military physicians in US POW prisons in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib...a little embarrassing to say the least. However, I cannot deny the need for our military or make statements doubting their importance.
Bradleigh
Veteran
Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia
I should state that Australia goes to war zones and stuff with our millitary, but the term that is used is peace keeping, this means no forcing people to take our side and is mostly helping people to rebuild. Our army has started to pull out, what we were doing was training there country to defend itself and helping there society, our soldier often get praised for skills and stuff and we actualy do not have all the top notch stuff. This means that we do not spend so much on tanks, jets, warships, missiles etc, infact it is funny that they say free countries don't have nuclear weapon when infact they do (I think).
All it might take is just some redistribution of funds, maybe less on things not needed and more on what is needed. Now I know that many do not belive in it, I would like to see that documentry that was made recently to get more of an idea, all I know is that we have it and it works. I saw a documentry once where it showed a guy and his wife trying to survive on minimum wage for a month, and by the end of it they were indebt due to health and would have been in trouble.
_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall
In North Carolina there was a couple both had HIV. Well they didn't make enough money to buy HIV drugs, no insurance either, they found out the goverment would pay for the drugs but their was a catch they had to live below the poverty line. So the quit their jobs and got new ones that payed far less because it was either live good for a while then die from HIV or live like crap and die slowly but have more time together. Seems like America is the best counry to live in if you want health care ![]()
I don't recall anyone claiming it is the best. So the government paid for their healthcare...where do you think the government got the money? Again...I cannot help but wonder if you have a job. The concept of 'free' you have bothers me.
