By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Screw it: secede from the Union!

TheRealMafoo said:
Quickdraw McGraw said:
TheRealMafoo said:

When the government spends money on the Military to protect me, on police to protect me, on the FDA to make sure my food is safe, on the fire department to protect me, on roads, emergency evacuation planning, and all the other things they spend money on, they do it to benefit me. I pay for services. I pay, so I do not have to go out and build a road myself, or train how to put out a fire, or police my surroundings.

With this rationale - why is healthcare unreasonable? Education? The stance that healthcare is a fundamental right is as easy to defend, or more so, than any service on that list.
Why is it instantly socialism when new programs are brought into the mix?

 

 

It's against the law for any hospital to not treat someone with a life threatening condition in the USA. Life is a right today, and we follow it.

Healthcare as you are thinking, is really more like health maintenance, and quality of life issues. Quality of life is the responsibility of the individual.

It's the governments job to protect you. It's your job to provide for you.

Protection against viruses/bacteria/accidents. It's not like people can just avoid most of the things that happen to them. Yes some are avoidable but not all. Just like I have no control and need protectoin against foreign countries, so too I have no control and need protectoin against accidents. You think people choose or can pevent getting cancer that easily?

 



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Around the Network
vlad321 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Quickdraw McGraw said:
TheRealMafoo said:

When the government spends money on the Military to protect me, on police to protect me, on the FDA to make sure my food is safe, on the fire department to protect me, on roads, emergency evacuation planning, and all the other things they spend money on, they do it to benefit me. I pay for services. I pay, so I do not have to go out and build a road myself, or train how to put out a fire, or police my surroundings.

With this rationale - why is healthcare unreasonable? Education? The stance that healthcare is a fundamental right is as easy to defend, or more so, than any service on that list.
Why is it instantly socialism when new programs are brought into the mix?

 

 

It's against the law for any hospital to not treat someone with a life threatening condition in the USA. Life is a right today, and we follow it.

Healthcare as you are thinking, is really more like health maintenance, and quality of life issues. Quality of life is the responsibility of the individual.

It's the governments job to protect you. It's your job to provide for you.

Protection against viruses/bacteria/accidents. It's not like people can just avoid most of the things that happen to them. Yes some are avoidable but not all. Just like I have no control and need protectoin against foreign countries, so too I have no control and need protectoin against accidents. You think people choose or can pevent getting cancer that easily?

 

 

I am not following you. If any of those things happen to you and it's life threatening, you will get treatment.

What's the problem?



TheRealMafoo said:

It's against the law for any hospital to not treat someone with a life threatening condition in the USA. Life is a right today, and we follow it.

Healthcare as you are thinking, is really more like health maintenance, and quality of life issues. Quality of life is the responsibility of the individual.

It's the governments job to protect you. It's your job to provide for you.

I'm referring mainly to health insurance providers, and their denying people crucial treatment.
You shouldn't have to die because you don't have money - morality doesn't work that way.

A common defense against free healthcare is that it reduces the competition in the private sector - but it doesn't if done right. The government simply acts as the sole provider, investing in the best equipment and medicine available, while providing the minimum treatment available to those who need it.



Even with flat taxes just because two people pay equal amounts who own the same amount of property doesn't mean they obtain the same amount of benefits. Person X and Person Y could live in two different towns in the same state and pay the same amount in gas tax. Town 1 may have shitty roads and Town 2 may have great roads based on the amount the cities are allocated per capita. They are paying the same but not getting the same benefit.

Its the same with people who own the same amount of property. Person X may live in an area with a higher crime rate than Person Y, so they benefit more from that protection than the other person does.

Even with people who shop at different grocery stores there are higher incidences of food contamination at some than others (like Wal-Mart, where the outbreaks most often occur). Those people who shop at Wal-Mart benefit more from the FDA than people who shop elsewhere because those other stores are less likely to buy cheap and shitty food.

I wasn't talking about national defense in the military spending example. I'm talking about a person who doesn't believe in waging war at all. Its not "fair" to make them pay the same amount in taxes for the military as those who are for waging war.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Quickdraw McGraw said:
TheRealMafoo said:

It's against the law for any hospital to not treat someone with a life threatening condition in the USA. Life is a right today, and we follow it.

Healthcare as you are thinking, is really more like health maintenance, and quality of life issues. Quality of life is the responsibility of the individual.

It's the governments job to protect you. It's your job to provide for you.

I'm referring mainly to health insurance providers, and their denying people crucial treatment.
You shouldn't have to die because you don't have money - morality doesn't work that way.

A common defense against free healthcare is that it reduces the competition in the private sector - but it doesn't if done right. The government simply acts as the sole provider, investing in the best equipment and medicine available, while providing the minimum treatment available to those who need it.

 

You hear this happening every day in the UK, except over there, it's the government doing it, as they are the provider.

I am all for healthcare reform. What we have today is the absolute worst solution posable. I am just not for indenturing one person to pay for another.



Around the Network
TheRealMafoo said:
vlad321 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Quickdraw McGraw said:
TheRealMafoo said:

When the government spends money on the Military to protect me, on police to protect me, on the FDA to make sure my food is safe, on the fire department to protect me, on roads, emergency evacuation planning, and all the other things they spend money on, they do it to benefit me. I pay for services. I pay, so I do not have to go out and build a road myself, or train how to put out a fire, or police my surroundings.

With this rationale - why is healthcare unreasonable? Education? The stance that healthcare is a fundamental right is as easy to defend, or more so, than any service on that list.
Why is it instantly socialism when new programs are brought into the mix?

 

 

It's against the law for any hospital to not treat someone with a life threatening condition in the USA. Life is a right today, and we follow it.

Healthcare as you are thinking, is really more like health maintenance, and quality of life issues. Quality of life is the responsibility of the individual.

It's the governments job to protect you. It's your job to provide for you.

Protection against viruses/bacteria/accidents. It's not like people can just avoid most of the things that happen to them. Yes some are avoidable but not all. Just like I have no control and need protectoin against foreign countries, so too I have no control and need protectoin against accidents. You think people choose or can pevent getting cancer that easily?

 

 

I am not following you. If any of those things happen to you and it's life threatening, you will get treatment.

What's the problem?

Cancer fighting drugs cost 5K a month.Who can afford such treatement , MAYBE 2%, propably top 1% of the population?

Before you start saying, "oh but that's different than the millitary." How  is it different? I can't afford those guns nor the expertise to defend myself. Same thing, I have neither the  money for the tools nor the expertise to personally deal with the problem.

 



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

I also like how well this thread has been salvaged. Though the first half is still delivers.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

akuma587 said:
Even with flat taxes just because two people pay equal amounts who own the same amount of property doesn't mean they obtain the same amount of benefits. Person X and Person Y could live in two different towns in the same state and pay the same amount in gas tax. Town 1 may have shitty roads and Town 2 may have great roads based on the amount the cities are allocated per capita. They are paying the same but not getting the same benefit.

Its the same with people who own the same amount of property. Person X may live in an area with a higher crime rate than Person Y, so they benefit more from that protection than the other person does.

Even with people who shop at different grocery stores there are higher incidences of food contamination at some than others (like Wal-Mart, where the outbreaks most often occur). Those people who shop at Wal-Mart benefit more from the FDA than people who shop elsewhere because those other stores are less likely to buy cheap and shitty food.

I wasn't talking about national defense in the military spending example. I'm talking about a person who doesn't believe in waging war at all. Its not "fair" to make them pay the same amount in taxes for the military as those who are for waging war.

 

Well, sometimes you get a better return on your investment. That's just the way it goes. Saying it's no different they just giving someone money however is a little far fetched.

As for the last line, waging war for anything other then our protection is unconstitutional, and thus taxes collected to pay for it should be criminal. If we arrested everyone in washington who doesn't (or didn't) follow the constitution, Ron Paul would be walking around, wondering where everyone went.



Locking before I ban a bunch of people.