Want Ron Paul to run in 2012?

[Jacob]

And that is the rub......you have no faith in the organizations to which we give.....the same organizations that deal with the poor and needy on a daily basis....what you are supporting is that the government knows best where the money (or hair in my analogy) is to be sent....not the church next to my house that feeds....and clothes....and seeks employment for those in need in my community. If I give the dollar to the man standing next to me....I know....this will do more good than giving that same dollar to the government that will make that same man wait in line to get .50 cents....Please and Thank you!

Of course I don't have any faith in them. Why would I have faith in ANY organization that is undemocratic, authoritarian, encourages ethnocentrism, doesn't take kindly to criticism and who's charity isn't motivated ONLY on the basis of altruisim but is more often than not used as a vehicle to propagate it's belief system and consolidate it's power within a society.

Are you speaking of charities in general or the liberal wing of the Democratic party?

:woot:

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

I had to abandon this topic instead of arguing pointlessly with those who like others to be coerced into giving them benefits.

Anyway, I thought this was quite relevant to a Ron Paul topic.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel ... eform.aspx

It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.

What a great, great quote.

 

[somone uk]

i know i would never really grasp the conservative american mentality, i am sure the uk wouldn't have such a numerous anti-nhs, though the tories seem to want to move it closer to the american system which is much more opposed than supported

i can see Americans whose conservative views overshadow any common sense, only in america could someone actually view a tax rise as an attack on their liberty, with this almost deluded sense almost if they were somehow exempt from the taxation system beforehand

did you know your taxes pay for those socialist firemen and Marxist policemen
complaining about "paying" for other people to get sick is almost as bad as saying:
"Why do i have to pay taxes for the fire brigade, I AM NOT THE ONE ON FIRE"

not having free healthcare is essentially like giving out a fine to whoever has the audacity to have a cardiac arrest out in public, just ruining everyone else's day, how i wouldn't want to be the poor hypothetical sod who has to wake up to a bill and a fine for soiling the bed

 

[Bryan]

i can see Americans whose conservative views overshadow any common sense, only in america could someone actually view a tax rise as an attack on their liberty, with this almost deluded sense almost if they were somehow exempt from the taxation system beforehand

did you know your taxes pay for those socialist firemen and Marxist policemen
complaining about "paying" for other people to get sick is almost as bad as saying:
"Why do i have to pay taxes for the fire brigade, I AM NOT THE ONE ON FIRE"

Exactly!! The lack of logic on such issues has been bred into us Americans by generations of reactionary politicians and media representatives (newspapers, and TV and radio talk-show hosts and commentators). It's shocking to me that we allow a socialistic approach to some things like policemen and firemen, but not to other very important things like healthcare. It's totally inconsistent.

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

i can see Americans whose conservative views overshadow any common sense, only in america could someone actually view a tax rise as an attack on their liberty, with this almost deluded sense almost if they were somehow exempt from the taxation system beforehand

did you know your taxes pay for those socialist firemen and Marxist policemen
complaining about "paying" for other people to get sick is almost as bad as saying:
"Why do i have to pay taxes for the fire brigade, I AM NOT THE ONE ON FIRE"

Exactly!! The lack of logic on such issues has been bred into us Americans by generations of reactionary politicians and media representatives (newspapers, and TV and radio talk-show hosts and commentators). It's shocking to me that we allow a socialistic approach to some things like policemen and firemen, but not to other very important things like healthcare. It's totally inconsistent.

A) The first problem is with the federal government controlling the "socialist" policemen and firemen. Sorry, you're the one who has had a total "lack of logic" and are being quite "reactionary" without thinking it through.

B) How is it bred in by reactionary politicians and commentators when it is precisely what the country was founded on? The rejection of forced taxation without consent? Sorry, you are the one who has had an anti-American thought "bred into you" by reactionary polticians and media representatives.

I am no Fox News watcher, but I am also not ignorant of history and economics. You obviously didn't read what I quoted a few of posts above, either.

Oh, and lest I forget:

C) There have always been private fire departments since the Colonial era almost 250 years ago til today (and, surprisingly, the private ones are more efficient and work better). Private police is shitty enough as it is, I don't think criticism of how horrible a service it is needs explaining.

 

[Bryan]

policemen and fireman are paid for their services by LOCAL tax dollars to serve and protect LOCAL residents don't get it twisted .

So what?

The reason America's healthcare is so expensive is because of the insurance industry. As a quick summary of the problem....You see they (insurance providers) only pay the Doctors a certain percentage for their services and they(the Doctors) are forced to accept that as payment in full for those with insurance.....Now, the payment to the Doctors are based on an average cost of whatever procedure your talking about (shitting your pants in "someone uk's" post for instance). In order for the Doctors to keep pace with the cost of doing business (ex: malpractice insurance) they have to inflate the cost of a procedure many times to hike the average for the procedures they perform. That way they are getting 50% of say.... $100 instead of 50% of $50 (the old price) for taking care of someone that sh*t their pants. Now...the really bad part of this whole situation is that if you don't have insurance you are now forced to pay the full cost of the procedure with no insurance discount......paying $100 for the Doctor's service instead of $50......and that is enough to make you sh*t your pants! Something needs to be done about the situation for sure....I just don't think the government handling the problem is the best way to go about it.

But the government handles it in the UK! Why does it seem to work okay for THEM?

Perhaps the best way to go about it, is to look at the example you provided of the policemen and firemen. Handle it LOCALLY

Why? Why do you think that would make a difference? :dunno:

 

[Bryan]

A) The first problem is with the federal government controlling the "socialist" policemen and firemen. Sorry, you're the one who has had a total "lack of logic" and are being quite "reactionary" without thinking it through.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

Oh, and lest I forget:

C) There have always been private fire departments since the Colonial era almost 250 years ago til today (and, surprisingly, the private ones are more efficient and work better). Private police is shitty enough as it is, I don't think criticism of how horrible a service it is needs explaining.

I'm completely baffled by what you're trying to say.

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

A) The first problem is with the federal government controlling the "socialist" policemen and firemen. Sorry, you're the one who has had a total "lack of logic" and are being quite "reactionary" without thinking it through.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

You're OK with socialist legislation at the federal level. Most Americans are not. We have a Constitution that forbids such legislation. States are allowed to do whatever they want.

If you, living in whatever state you're in, choose to support free health care for your state, I don't care. It doesn't affect me in my state. But don't support a federal health care bill when it is both unconstitutional and economically non-viable.

Oh, and lest I forget:

C) There have always been private fire departments since the Colonial era almost 250 years ago til today (and, surprisingly, the private ones are more efficient and work better). Private police is shitty enough as it is, I don't think criticism of how horrible a service it is needs explaining.

I'm completely baffled by what you're trying to say.

[/quote]

Are private fire departments that aren't ran by any government totally baffling to you?

 

[HughJass]

And that is the rub......you have no faith in the organizations to which we give.....the same organizations that deal with the poor and needy on a daily basis....what you are supporting is that the government knows best where the money (or hair in my analogy) is to be sent....not the church next to my house that feeds....and clothes....and seeks employment for those in need in my community. If I give the dollar to the man standing next to me....I know....this will do more good than giving that same dollar to the government that will make that same man wait in line to get .50 cents....Please and Thank you!

Of course I don't have any faith in them. Why would I have faith in ANY organization that is undemocratic, authoritarian, encourages ethnocentrism, doesn't take kindly to criticism and who's charity isn't motivated ONLY on the basis of altruisim but is more often than not used as a vehicle to propagate it's belief system and consolidate it's power within a society.

Are you speaking of charities in general or the liberal wing of the Democratic party?

obviously I was speaking about that pyramid scheme called Christianity which appears to have a never ending supply of gullible financial contributors....

 

[HughJass]

quit driving on those socialist roads! and stop drinking that socialist water from your taps!




:shakehead:

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

quit driving on those socialist roads! and stop drinking that socialist water from your taps!




:shakehead:

I'd love to but the government has a monopoly on them. Privately maintained roads are a better solution, as is a private water system that isn't dirty and poisoning us with too much fluoride.

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

obviously I was speaking about that pyramid scheme called Christianity which appears to have a never ending supply of gullible financial contributors....

I hope you're not subtley implying that a Mr. Richard Dawkins isn't making millions off of his own little scheme.

 

[The Gardener]

But the government handles it in the UK! Why does it seem to work okay for THEM?

Bryan, the UK is broke. All of Western Europe is broke. Just as broke as we are, and on a debt/GDP basis, they are actually in worse shape.

The US is tacking about $2 trillion a year onto our national debt. What are your thoughts on the sustainability of this?

I think pointing to other countries that are as broke if not more broke than we are, and saying "well it works for them" is an illogical answer.

Our society has become too top heavy. And the US government is about the most corrupt amongst all in the Western world. It's gone from being a service provider to being a cash teat for lobbyists who bid the highest and wield the most influence. It has become a parasite that is now killing its host, the real economy.

 

[HughJass]

I'd love to but the government has a monopoly on them. Privately maintained roads are a better solution, as is a private water system that isn't dirty and poisoning us with too much fluoride.

I'm sure the private sector would have nothing but value for money in mind when deciding how much to charge us for driving on their roads and drinking their water....

I hope you're not subtley implying that a Mr. Richard Dawkins isn't making millions off of his own little scheme.

People don't buy Dawkins' books because he'd told them from childhood they'd burn in hell if they didn't.

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

I'd love to but the government has a monopoly on them. Privately maintained roads are a better solution, as is a private water system that isn't dirty and poisoning us with too much fluoride.

I'm sure the private sector would have nothing but value for money in mind when deciding how much to charge us for driving on their roads and drinking their water....

The government already does that so I don't understand your argument. I think you're making my case for me.

People don't buy Dawkins' books because he'd told them from childhood they'd burn in hell if they didn't.

Right, they buy them because he says they won't burn in hell. Very comforting thought, I'm sure, and a great selling point from a former biologist who decided to abandon science for pseudo-philosophy.

 

[somone uk]

But the government handles it in the UK! Why does it seem to work okay for THEM?

Bryan, the UK is broke. All of Western Europe is broke. Just as broke as we are, and on a debt/GDP basis, they are actually in worse shape.
.

UK is 0.42 years
USA is 0.925 years

and the graph that is featured on the us debt/gdp has proven that it has been higher than the uk even before the recession
actually i have failed to find a European country that reaches the us figure, even the infamous Greek epidemic still fails to reach the american figure in debt to gdp

I'd love to but the government has a monopoly on them. Privately maintained roads are a better solution, as is a private water system that isn't dirty and poisoning us with too much fluoride.

i am not quite old enough to be alive back when the uk had nationalised water but i could say the uk's few privatised roads were a dreadful failure, privatiesed roads are a rediculous idea because you will either have a monopoly or a bunch of redundant roads added just to give the consumer the free market choice between the macdonalds road or the kfc road

I hope you're not subtley implying that a Mr. Richard Dawkins isn't making millions off of his own little scheme.

Richard dawkins is making millions as a best-selling author, because he sold books :smack:
and for the record his new book is about evolution not religion and he started being a vocal atheist because of the dispute about teaching evolution in schools, as an evolutionary biologist i am sure he would have a strong opinion

 

[Bryan]

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

You're OK with socialist legislation at the federal level. Most Americans are not. We have a Constitution that forbids such legislation.

Where does the Constitution forbid such legislation?

Are private fire departments that aren't ran by any government totally baffling to you?

No. What you were trying to say is baffling to me.

 

[Bryan]

But the government handles it in the UK! Why does it seem to work okay for THEM?

Bryan, the UK is broke. All of Western Europe is broke. Just as broke as we are, and on a debt/GDP basis, they are actually in worse shape.

Uhhhhh......okay. So what? What's your point? :dunno:

The US is tacking about $2 trillion a year onto our national debt. What are your thoughts on the sustainability of this?

It's BAD. Not sustainable. So what? What's your point? :dunno:

I think pointing to other countries that are as broke if not more broke than we are, and saying "well it works for them" is an illogical answer.

What on earth is "illogical" about it?? We weren't discussing which country handles its economy more effectively, we were discussing WHICH COUNTRY HANDLES ITS HEALTHCARE MORE EFFECTIVELY! And I'm still waiting for you or anybody else to explain why the Brits can do something which so eludes us Americans.

Our society has become too top heavy. And the US government is about the most corrupt amongst all in the Western world. It's gone from being a service provider to being a cash teat for lobbyists who bid the highest and wield the most influence. It has become a parasite that is now killing its host, the real economy.

Agreed. Now can we finally get back to the issue at hand? How can the Brits do something with healthcare that so baffles us?? :shock:

 

[HughJass]

The government already does that so I don't understand your argument.

already does what? attempts to deliver value for money for services?


New research suggests governments could do a lot better if they borrowed the money, built the roads and kept the assets in taxpayers’ hands

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3066120.htm

Right, they buy them because he says they won't burn in hell

generally speaking, Dawkins admirers don't rely on books when it comes to evaluating whether stories about talking snakes and lakes of fire are real or not.

Very comforting thought

Rational thoughts usually are

 

[HughJass]

Agreed. Now can we finally get back to the issue at hand? How can the Brits do something with healthcare that so baffles us?? :shock:

They're born communists. It's in their blood.