Page 2 of 2 [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Xenu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,438

05 Jul 2012, 2:24 pm

Delphiki wrote:
Xenu wrote:
hanyo wrote:
Xenu wrote:

I think medicaid should be abolioshed, it's their fault they can't afford it. And it's not an essential service and Obamacare isn't free either.


I don't think that.

Then enjoy prices going up even more because of all the people that need to go to the emergency room and run up expensive bills to get any health care at all and then just not pay the bill.


Well I'm sorry you have an uncivilized view on politics and economics.

And it's peoples own damn fault for not being able to afford insurance. Forcing people to buy this plan whether they want it or not is not the way to go about things.
You used Trump as reasoning...


And? Trump may be an as*hole but he knows what hes' talking about. Plus any idiot with a basic grasp of how the world works realizes that this plan makes no sense.

Delphiki wrote:
Xenu wrote:
hanyo wrote:
Xenu wrote:

And it's peoples own damn fault for not being able to afford insurance. Forcing people to buy this plan whether they want it or not is not the way to go about things.


So if you are physically or mentally disabled and can't work and because of this live off welfare or get disability or get supported by a relative and can't afford health care you don't deserve it and should just go die?

Whether it's this plan or something else something needs to be done.


Having Aspergers doesn't make it so you can't work, and the people with Aspergers that try to claim that make me sick, I and plenty other people have Aspergers and while working may be a bit more challenging then most I'm not going to be a baby and just refuse to work because of some difficulties i can get past. And personally if somebody is physically disabled or mentally disabled to the point where they aren't able to contribute whatsoever then I'm honestly in favor of euthanizing them as they are a tax burden and they probably don't want to be alive because of their situation in the first place (or in the mentally retarded they don't even fully know they are alive in the first place).
this could very well apply to most people on this forum. If you are autistic then you are mentally disabled. In turn you probably do not want to be alive. Let's go get euthanized. (I am in no way saying I believe autism is a mental disability or that it affects intelligence. But there are some people who would think it would)


I'm pretty sure I was pretty damn clear I'm talking about people who are pretty much nonfunctional.



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Age: 177
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,415
Location: My own version of reality

05 Jul 2012, 2:26 pm

Xenu wrote:
Delphiki wrote:
Xenu wrote:
hanyo wrote:
Xenu wrote:

And it's peoples own damn fault for not being able to afford insurance. Forcing people to buy this plan whether they want it or not is not the way to go about things.


So if you are physically or mentally disabled and can't work and because of this live off welfare or get disability or get supported by a relative and can't afford health care you don't deserve it and should just go die?

Whether it's this plan or something else something needs to be done.


Having Aspergers doesn't make it so you can't work, and the people with Aspergers that try to claim that make me sick, I and plenty other people have Aspergers and while working may be a bit more challenging then most I'm not going to be a baby and just refuse to work because of some difficulties i can get past. And personally if somebody is physically disabled or mentally disabled to the point where they aren't able to contribute whatsoever then I'm honestly in favor of euthanizing them as they are a tax burden and they probably don't want to be alive because of their situation in the first place (or in the mentally retarded they don't even fully know they are alive in the first place).
this could very well apply to most people on this forum. If you are autistic then you are mentally disabled. In turn you probably do not want to be alive. Let's go get euthanized. (I am in no way saying I believe autism is a mental disability or that it affects intelligence. But there are some people who would think it would)


I'm pretty sure I was pretty damn clear I'm talking about people who are pretty much nonfunctional.
That is open to interpretation.


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


Xenu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,438

05 Jul 2012, 2:30 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Xenu wrote:
The issue is first of all WE CAN'T AFFORD THIS. Second of all is health care is not a right and many people don't want to be FORCED to pay for something they don't want.


Of course you can afford it. You have the largest economy on the planet, and individuals are vastly undertaxed compared with almost any other country in the OECD.

No one has suggested that government programs should be founded on citizens' rights. You don't have a right to an education, but government provides schools. You don't have a right to buy imported goods and to export the goods that you make--but the government enters into trade agreements.

And finally, the fact that many people don't want the program does not make it unconstitutional, illegal or improper.

Quote:
I think medicaid should be abolioshed, it's their fault they can't afford it. And it's not an essential service and Obamacare isn't free either.


Since when does fault enter into the picture? Insurance isn't about laying blame--insurance is about protecting you from catastrophic expenses for things that are your fault. You cause a motor vehicle accident--it's your liability insurance that covers the damage you caused. You fail to shovel your front walk and your friend falls and breaks a hip--it's your homeowner's insurance that covers the damage that you caused.

Insurance is about protecting you from your faults.

Quote:
Well I'm sorry you have an uncivilized view on politics and economics.

And it's peoples own damn fault for not being able to afford insurance. Forcing people to buy this plan whether they want it or not is not the way to go about things.


When someone needs a definition of "irony," we can now point them to this statement.

Civilization is about the bringing together of people within cultural frameworks that provide for mutual exchange of knowledge, prosperity and protection. You, on the other hand, would see people cut off from civilization by reason of their financial capacity. This is no less uncivilized than Scrooge's, "then let them die and decrease the surplus population."

Quote:
Having Aspergers doesn't make it so you can't work, and the people with Aspergers that try to claim that make me sick, I and plenty other people have Aspergers and while working may be a bit more challenging then most I'm not going to be a baby and just refuse to work because of some difficulties i can get past. And personally if somebody is physically disabled or mentally disabled to the point where they aren't able to contribute whatsoever then I'm honestly in favor of euthanizing them as they are a tax burden and they probably don't want to be alive because of their situation in the first place (or in the mentally retarded they don't even fully know they are alive in the first place).


Who said anything about Asperger's?

As for your euthanasia proposals, and the suggestion that people who are disabled probably don't want to be alive because of their situation, you cannot be as stupid as those statements suggest. If you aren't going to participate in this forum as a rational adult, then perhaps you need to go back to the teen forum.

I am all for people having opinions--even unpopular opinions. But I will not sit idly by and let stupidity go unchallenged.


1. You obviously don't know to much about America's current economic state kiddo because we really can't afford it. We are on the brink of a second great depression because of the past 12 years of 2 terrible presidents.

2. >Implying I support Government programs in the first place

3. And if people want it then they should get it, if people don't want it then they shouldn't have to get it, and if people can't afford to get it then it's their own damn fault. It's not a necessity. The Government shouldn't have to catch everybody when they fall and clean up their mistakes, grown adults are adults, not babies.

4. And what necessarily is wrong with Scrooges views? Fiscally Conservative ideologies while they don't benefit the lazy stupid bottom-feeders does benefit everybody else and has been proven to be a successful way of running a country.

5. Well I believe it was pretty obvious that poster was implying Aspergers

6. If they can't contribute they shouldn't be here.



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Age: 177
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,415
Location: My own version of reality

05 Jul 2012, 2:32 pm

kiddo? You are not even older than him to devolve to having to use that insult


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


Xenu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,438

05 Jul 2012, 2:48 pm

Delphiki wrote:
kiddo? You are not even older than him to devolve to having to use that insult


Talking about mental/emotional maturity. If somebody thinks that the Government should pay for a life of laziness and mooching even if it's not your own life (well especially if it's not your own) then they aren't very mature.



SpiritBlooms
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,024

05 Jul 2012, 2:51 pm

...



Last edited by SpiritBlooms on 09 Jul 2012, 7:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Jul 2012, 3:03 pm

Xenu wrote:
1. You obviously don't know to much about America's current economic state kiddo because we really can't afford it. We are on the brink of a second great depression because of the past 12 years of 2 terrible presidents.


You are on the brink because you have a Congress that is too cowardly to raise the taxes necessary to pay for the level of government that your citizens demand--and that has been allowed to get away with it for 40 years because whenever the chips are down, people run to the dollar for cover.

I have a feeling that I know a hell of a lot more than you about your country's current economic state. If you want to have a discussion about US fiscal and monetary policy, let's have at it.

Quote:
2. >Implying I support Government programs in the first place


Well, since you suggest that another posters view of politics and economics was "uncivilized" it's pretty clear that you support the notion of civilization. And if you support civilization, then you must ipso facto support government of some kind, because the former cannot exist without the latter. It never has, and it never will.

Quote:
3. And if people want it then they should get it, if people don't want it then they shouldn't have to get it, and if people can't afford to get it then it's their own damn fault. It's not a necessity. The Government shouldn't have to catch everybody when they fall and clean up their mistakes, grown adults are adults, not babies.


You might believe that it's not a necessity, but the overwhelming evidence is against you on this. There does not exist a single civilized nation on earth in which health care is not a fundamental area of government responsibility. There are plenty of methods of providing access, to be sure. And what works in one country might not be a good fit for another country. But no civilized nation can function to its full potential in the absence of comprehensive access to medically necessary care.

Quote:
4. And what necessarily is wrong with Scrooges views? Fiscally Conservative ideologies while they don't benefit the lazy stupid bottom-feeders does benefit everybody else and has been proven to be a successful way of running a country.


A fair question.

Keeping the "bottom feeders" benefits us directly in two very important ways:

First, not doing so is the short road to economic stagnation. Economic growth can come from two--and only two--sources: innovation, and population growth. Innovation lets us proverbially, "do more with less," creating greater economic output with the same level of inputs. But innovation is only half the picture. When your economy expands through the establishment of new producers, those producers need workers and they need customers.

If we got rid of all the "bottom feeders" in the current economic climate, then where would the available workers be for the next round of economic expansion? In an environment where the surplus population is killed off, you then create a seller's market in labour, where supply exceeds demand, and sends the cost of production through the roof--creating the conditions for inflation, and the resulting contraction of the economy in real terms.

Second, the link between crime (particularly violent crime) and poverty is well established. When government fails to take steps to mitigate poverty, government knowingly increases crime. My house is protected from break-in and theft, in part, because my government takes steps to ensure that people in my province don't need to steal to eat. And when my government fails to do that (as they have been doing for the last decade), the result is an increase in property crime, putting me at greater risk of break-in and theft--and imposing higher insurance premiums on me as a result.

Quote:
5. Well I believe it was pretty obvious that poster was implying Aspergers


Again, your beliefs are getting in the way of you saying anything intelligent.

Quote:
6. If they can't contribute they shouldn't be here.


Define contribute.

Does a stay-at-home parent contribute? Any economist will tell you that such a person absolutely does. But that person earns no money for that contribution, and does not have access to care except though the benificence of a working parent's insurer. And, of course, in the absence of government regulation, the employer and the insurer have absolutely no interest in insuring workers' dependents.

Your thinking is so clearly limited to the immediate transaction. In the vernacular, you cannot see the forest for the trees. Until you can start to think about how transactions are interrelated and how they aggregate to form an economy, your thinking will always be limited.


_________________
--James


Last edited by visagrunt on 05 Jul 2012, 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Jul 2012, 3:16 pm

visagrunt wrote:

Well, since you suggest that another posters view of politics and economics was "uncivilized" it's pretty clear that you support the notion of civilization. And if you support civilization, then you must ipso facto support government of some kind, because the former cannot exist without the latter. It never has, and it never will.

.


What if the government is unjust and tyranical? Should we support it for fight it?

The U.S. government runs in contradiction to its own Constitution. So if it is not unjust, then it is constitutionally illegal. For example Justice Roberts declared the mandate in the ACA a tax. But it originated in the Senate and the U.S. Constitution Art I , Sec 7 says all revenue raising bills (fees, taxes, fines etc) must originate in the House.

You see what I mean?

The U.S Constitution lies on the ground severely wounded and bleeding if not already dead. If the Constitution is dead then what is the warrant for our current government?

ruveyn



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

05 Jul 2012, 3:27 pm

ruveyn wrote:
What if the government is unjust and tyranical? Should we support it for fight it?

The U.S. government runs in contradiction to its own Constitution. So if it is not unjust, then it is constitutionally illegal. For example Justice Roberts declared the mandate in the ACA a tax. But it originated in the Senate and the U.S. Constitution Art I , Sec 7 says all revenue raising bills (fees, taxes, fines etc) must originate in the House.

You see what I mean?

The U.S Constitution lies on the ground severely wounded and bleeding if not already dead. If the Constitution is dead then what is the warrant for our current government?

ruveyn


No so fast, smart guy. The Senate took up HR 3590, and amended it. This has been accepted as a perfectly legitimate use of the Senate's power to propose or concur with amendments that appears in the same Article I, Section 7.

But your original question is still a fair question. My response would be that so long as you are provided with the peaceful means to contrain government, you have no justification for "fighting" it--in the sense of taking up arms against it.

If you can assemble sufficient numbers of the body politic to enforce change, then by all means do so. Start demanding better of those whom you elect, for a start. But do not pretend that government has become tyranny simply because your electorate has become too lazy to hold them to account at the polling station. The fault lies with voters, there.


_________________
--James


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

05 Jul 2012, 7:08 pm

I support the single payer healthcare opition. But Xenu your statements just make me sad. That their are people in this world that agree with.

Donald Trump.