[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]Funded in what way?[/quote]
Can't be serious.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]
This is ridiculous and needlessly convoluted. If people are really that poor, they can't afford insurance in the first place, and making similar options elsewhere available won't help. Why would insurance companies lower their prices anyway? What incentive could they have then that they don't have now? Medicare and Medicaid are also good things because those actually do make healthcare more available to those who need it and cannot afford it.
[/quote]
You aren't economically inclined enough, i take it, to understand these two things:
a) That blog post is a critique of our current system, it isn't a critique of social medicine. (I think there's a part in there about the big-government "solution", probably critiques that too)
b) Government psudo-involvement distorts the market and increases prices. Medical care was easily affordable before those systems strangled the medical system to death.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]
Potentially limitless price increases? How? What? The entire point of Socialized healthcare is that it's "free" and paid for by taxes. Single-person prices couldn't possible go up because there are none, sans cosmetic procedures and the like. As for the last sentence, is that true anywhere else? I thought not.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]
I don't even know how you took this seriously. Government only wants to be in health care to maintain high drug and insurance prices? The entire reason people argue for socialized healthcare today is because of how high insurance prices are under privatized rule.[/quote]
Once again it's a critique of our current system and not of yours, granted i don't agree with it, but you're taking it to a personal level. Any critique of medicine is not a critique of social medicine.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]
Hahaha, oh wow. Why would the doctors donate? They have no reason to do so, except out the kindness of their own heart. If this guy [B]honestly[/B] believes that the poor are so few that a few donations would cover them, he's delusional.[/quote]
You skipped over the parts with the dollar for dollar tax break stuff, wonder why, if the doctors could essentially pay less taxes (or even none) by helping individuals i don't see why they wouldn't. Pretty fucking sweet deal. Entire hospitals could have the same situation going on. An entire medical hospital could pay no taxes for several years because of the charity of one year.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29076963]
Okay, I really have to address this last sentence. THE ONLY METHOD THAT HAS EVER WORKED IS THE FREE MARKET? You have got to be kidding me. This guy makes some good points in the specific proposals section, but the rest is an absolute joke. I'm not saying these things invalidate your source's credibility, but it seriously calls it into question.[/QUOTE]
The source is google and i agree with a majority of his points, some not, but they're food for thought. For addressing prices, he's mostly correct, the [b]free[/b] market has been successful in that respect. Today, there is no free market in the medical sector [b]whatsoever[/b], you can twist it around all you like but it just isn't true. It's an unfair broken market that has nothing to do with competition or free trade and to label it as such is a grave mistake and woefully ignorant.
At a time, medical costs were very cheap. Cheap enough to the point a majority of people could afford them easily. Why is it so out of control today? It can't just be the advancement in medicine, there are a variety of other factors you're outright ignoring. Most government involvement. You distort the market and then point to it and say, see that? Free market failure over there.
It just doesn't work in any real sense.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29076897]And why isn't it, really?
I mean this: Can you articulate why such a situation is impossible to us all, so we know, not from the socialist perspective but i mean as a critique on society as it exists in America today. Not what could fix it, i just want to know why it is impossible to pick yourself up.
I'll make it clear: I'm not arguing with you, i agree, today it is fairly hard to pick yourself up and get a leg up. i just want to see how your logic works.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying that it's impossible, I'm saying that it's improbable. Nobody deserves to have society turn its back on them, that's why I want programs in place to help the people who need it.
The fact that those people are getting help completely outweighs the fact that some people who don't need help exploit it.
Ideally I want social programs implemented so effectively that nobody can ever get to the point where they have nothing.
[QUOTE=Shooter;29076662]"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. [b]I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy [i]in[/i] poverty, but leading or driving them [I]out[/I] of it.[/b] In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, [b]the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.[/b]"
[b]- Benjamin Franklin[/b][/QUOTE]
This is the entire essence of libertarianism.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077261]This is the entire essence of libertarianism.[/QUOTE]
you're the entire essence of missing a page of discussion
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077261]This is the entire essence of libertarianism.[/QUOTE]
You mean by not? You know the government pays for a lot of things like dentists and glasses right? So no it will be a lot worse.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077261]The same way they do now.[/QUOTE]
you couldn't be further from the truth, mr. glenn beck fan
education and healthcare in america right now are hardly free-market. just make sure you practice what you preach.
The people who [i]don't[/i] break out of a slump simply [b]lack the work ethic to do so.[/b]
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077261]This is the entire essence of libertarianism.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Give people the tools and encouragement to work themselves out of the bottom.
That is why public education is free, people.
Despite all our arguing and words and discussion and insults nothing will actually really happen.
The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29077030]People who inherit too much do not deserve to keep it.
By this I refer to people like the aristocracy, and I hate having been descended from one of the inbred backwards aristocrats from Tsarist Russia.[/QUOTE]
While aristos may be simply sons of people who happen to be descendants of some nobleman, what about people who are sons of self-made millionaires? Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?
It's unnerving to think that, while I would very much like to keep all the money my father made, I didn't actually do anything to deserve it. That's cognitive dissonance for you.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29077365]Despite all our arguing and words and discussion and insults nothing will actually really happen.
The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.[/QUOTE]
Well, it's not the questions that will be settled by blood, but the means to address them.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29077365]Despite all our arguing and words and discussion and insults nothing will actually really happen.
The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.[/QUOTE]
You sound like the Ordo Malleus for some reason.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29077365]Despite all our arguing and words and discussion and insults nothing will actually really happen.
The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood.[/QUOTE]
Where will we find this iron and blood? The most obese population on the planet certainly can't rise to their feet without a struggle.
EDIT: This is America I'm talking about, by the way. I realize that many Facepunch-ers aren't American.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;29076774]I'm not sure how I can
Franklin's time was different, the job market was nowhere near as competitive
Back then if you had no schooling you could just show up at a farm or a mine and get a job, these days you need at least high school for both of those
There are no jobs today for someone who has nothing, you either need an education, money, or connections.[/QUOTE]
Bull fucking shit. Plenty of people are high school drop outs and work jobs. Hell one of my closest friends and her boyfriend are both drop outs. One of them works for a state park and the other is an artist.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;29077205]I'm not saying that it's impossible, I'm saying that it's improbable. Nobody deserves to have society turn its back on them, that's why I want programs in place to help the people who need it.
The fact that those people are getting help completely outweighs the fact that some people who don't need help exploit it.[/QUOTE]
I personally don't care if people exploit social services. It isn't really exploitation, anyway, when the government allows it to happens in it's guidelines.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;29077205]Ideally I want social programs implemented so effectively that nobody can ever get to the point where they have nothing.[/quote]
In American society today a majority of the time there isn't a way to get there. Medical hospitals still foot the bill for emergency situations, homeless still have places to sleep and get cleaned up (no, i don't mean prison), there are plenty of social nets in place that people just don't acknowledge because they aren't government run or are government run and people just ignore in their arguments, anyway.
If you went with the tax breaks for institutions willing to be charitable and gave them [i]incentive[/i] for being charitable, there would be charity. Not just giving them money but a safeguard from taking it away from them in the form of taxes, would be enough for most places.
Even without incentives history has proven people can be charitable in any circumstances (like today, in our cut throat pig disgusting corporatist society, there are people out there right now giving away money, time and energy to assist the poor without pay). It's disconcerting that you all think without directly taking money from the rich people couldn't be "charitable", it's false. Not only that but it also is a symptom of a larger, economic issue that the rich hold a majority of the money in society today. It isn't an issue of them being greedy, it really isn't, its an issue of economic policies which lead to the giant gap in income in the first place. Taking money from them to fund government operations for the poor is a horrible solution, I'll reply to this in a separate post if you wish.
Food pantries run by churches were giving out food through the recession, feeding the homeless and elderly who couldn't afford it. They also don't pay taxes, but they wouldn't have paid taxes anyway. They could have kept the money to themselves to build another level on to their church or improved their catholic high school which they also fund. They didn't though, they gave away bread, soup, canned foods, ramen and things of that nature. Lollipops to children who went there too.
I won't subscribe to their bullshit religious ideology but i refuse to believe people can't be charitable in the right circumstances. They have no chance in our society, today.
[QUOTE=torero;29077379]While aristos may be simply sons of people who happen to be descendants of some nobleman, what about people who are sons of self-made millionaires? Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?[/QUOTE]
It isn't a question of "Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?", it's a question of "What gives you the right to take it?"
Just because it may be to fund the poor, just because it may be used to fix roads or build tanks, doesn't mean robbery is justified. If the self-made millionaire made the money he should be able to spend it in a way he desires, not in a way you desire.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077431]Plenty of people are high school drop outs and work jobs. One of them works for a state park [b]and the other is an artist.[/b][/QUOTE]
lol
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077485]
It isn't a question of "Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?", it's a question of "What gives you the right to take it?"
Just because it may be to fund the poor, just because it may be used to fix roads or build tanks, doesn't mean robbery is justified. If the self-made millionaire made the money he should be able to spend it in a way he desires, not in a way you desire.[/QUOTE]
Good point. I find myself in agreement with you on this issue.
[QUOTE=Shooter;29077317]The people who [i]don't[/i] break out of a slump simply [b]lack the work ethic to do so.[/b]
[/QUOTE]
Yep its your fault your poor not your moms drugs addiction.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077431]Bull fucking shit. Plenty of people are high school drop outs and work jobs. Hell one of my closest friends and her boyfriend are both drop outs. One of them works for a state park and the other is an artist.[/QUOTE]
It's the down-and-out attitude that is fueling unemployment and obesity. If you have intelligence and a work ethic, you aren't doomed
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;29077504]Yep its your fault your poor not your moms drugs addiction.[/QUOTE]
But what will [u]you[/u] do to insure you don't fall down there? (That's an expression of an attitude, by the way, I don't know your personal situation.)
[QUOTE=Shooter;29077505]It's the down-and-out attitude that is fueling unemployment and obesity. If you have intelligence and a work ethic, you aren't doomed[/QUOTE]
No its the bad economy. Sorry but a huge part of it is luck and I know a lot of poor smart people.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077485]I personally don't care if people exploit social services. It isn't really exploitation, anyway, when the government allows it to happens in it's guidelines.
In American society today a majority of the time there isn't a way to get there. Medical hospitals still foot the bill for emergency situations, homeless still have places to sleep and get cleaned up (no, i don't mean prison), there are plenty of social nets in place that people just don't acknowledge because they aren't government run or are government run and people just ignore in their arguments, anyway.
If you went with the tax breaks for institutions willing to be charitable and gave them [i]incentive[/i] for being charitable, there would be charity. Not just giving them money but a safeguard from taking it away from them in the form of taxes, would be enough for most places.
Even without incentives history has proven people can be charitable in any circumstances (like today, in our cut throat pig disgusting corporatist society, there are people out there right now giving away money, time and energy to assist the poor without pay). It's disconcerting that you all think without directly taking money from the rich people couldn't be "charitable", it's false.
Food pantries run by churches were giving out food through the recession, feeding the homeless and elderly who couldn't afford it. They also don't pay taxes, but they wouldn't have paid taxes anyway. They could have kept the money to themselves to build another level on to their church or improved their catholic high school which they also fund. They didn't though, they gave away bread, soup, canned foods, ramen and things of that nature. Lollipops to children who went there too.
I won't subscribe to their bullshit religious ideology but i refuse to believe people can't be charitable in the right circumstances. They have no chance in our society, today.
It isn't a question of "Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?", it's a question of "What gives you the right to take it?"
Just because it may be to fund the poor, just because it may be used to fix roads or build tanks, doesn't mean robbery is justified. If the self-made millionaire made the money he should be able to spend it in a way he desires, not in a way you desire.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you sir. On just about every point.
[QUOTE=alucard_extreme;29077068]for an [b]elitist oligarch agenda[/b]. they are in power for a very evident reason. read some more books, please[/quote]
Books are no more valid a resource than any equally credible resource on the internet.
[QUOTE=alucard_extreme;29077068]as if you expect me to spend my night looking up a source just for you, im not going to waste my time. this point* comes from acquired knowledge through many readings over a vast period of time and many social interactions with various people; something you are too antisocial and lazy to accomplish which is evident in your rhetoric.[/quote]
In an argument, if you make a claim like you did, you have to actually back it up with something. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you, not me. It should not be my job to prove your point for you.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077485]
It isn't a question of "Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?", it's a question of "What gives you the right to take it?"
Just because it may be to fund the poor, just because it may be used to fix roads or build tanks, doesn't mean robbery is justified. If the self-made millionaire made the money he should be able to spend it in a way he desires, not in a way you desire.[/QUOTE]
It isn't robbery. They contribute to society by giving what they have earned back to society. By doing this, everyone have a better chance of surviving, a better chance of making sure everyone gets a fair chance of becoming happy. It also provides everyone with better social programs, the goverment can distribute the money into those who are not as lucky.
Anyone with a work ethic can get a job today. People blame the economy for their own incompetence. I filled out TWO applications total, and I got a job for one and for the other I'm scheduling an interview with and might work there too/instead. And the job I currently got, I got the second I turned in my application. I walked in there, turned in my application and she's like "you have no work history?" and I was like "no ma'am, I haven't worked before" and she was like "when is the soonest you can start?" and I was like "anytime" and she put me to work the next day. It's minimum wage and part time, but it's a paycheck. People just need to make looking for a job, a job.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077753]Anyone with a work ethic can get a job today.[/QUOTE]
No what you mean is most people can get some form of job if they try hard enough.
But really you have shown that you have no idea how the world works.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077753]Anyone with a work ethic can get a job today. People blame the economy for their own incompetence. I filled out TWO applications total, and I got a job for one and for the other I'm scheduling an interview with and might work there too/instead. And the job I currently got, I got the second I turned in my application. I walked in there, turned in my application and she's like "you have no work history?" and I was like "no ma'am, I haven't worked before" and she was like "when is the soonest you can start?" and I was like "anytime" and she put me to work the next day. It's minimum wage and part time, but it's a paycheck. People just need to make looking for a job, a job.[/QUOTE]
How fucking ignorant do you have to be?
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077485]It isn't a question of "Why do they deserve to keep their inheritance?", it's a question of "What gives you the right to take it?"
Just because it may be to fund the poor, just because it may be used to fix roads or build tanks, doesn't mean robbery is justified. If the self-made millionaire made the money he should be able to spend it in a way he desires, not in a way you desire.[/QUOTE]
What right does any man have to owning millions in the first place? Nobody's time is worth that much. Nobody makes that kind of money without exploiting a lot of people.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]You aren't economically inclined enough, i take it, to understand these two things:
a) That blog post is a critique of our current system, it isn't a critique of social medicine. (I think there's a part in there about the big-government "solution", probably critiques that too)
b) Government psudo-involvement distorts the market and increases prices. Medical care was easily affordable before those systems strangled the medical system to death.[/quote]
I'm not economically inclined enough? What does that even mean? I understand it's a critique of the current system as a whole, and not just socialized medicine, but I was addressing the parts about socialized medicine, as that was what we were talking about.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]Once again it's a critique of our current system and not of yours, granted i don't agree with it, but you're taking it to a personal level. Any critique of medicine is not a critique of social medicine.[/quote]
Not of 'Yours'? Who? You mean the system I live in? Of course a critique of medicine in general is not a critique of socialized medicine, but an endorsement of entirely free market medicine while detailed the negatives of the polar opposite is a critique of socialized medicine.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]The source is google and i agree with a majority of his points, some not, but they're food for thought.[/quote]
I suppose it is food for thought, but the source is not Google, and it can't be. It's a search engine.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]For addressing prices, he's mostly correct, the [b]free[/b] market has been successful in that respect. Today, there is no free market in the medical sector [b]whatsoever[/b], you can twist it around all you like but it just isn't true. It's an unfair broken market that has nothing to do with competition or free trade and to label it as such is a grave mistake and woefully ignorant.[/quote]
Perhaps in America, the medical sector is indeed broken and unfair, but to make such a statement as "the free market is the only thing that has worked" is just false. Prices in socialized medicine aren't higher. How would the Free Market be better at addressing price issues? It would just be better to have everyone have access to medicine that's paid for beforehand, rather than having to worry about paying for insurance on your own. It benefits everyone.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]It can't just be the advancement in medicine, there are a variety of other factors you're outright ignoring. Most government involvement. You distort the market and then point to it and say, see that? Free market failure over there.[/quote]
I wouldn't call the American market an entirely free one, because it's not. You're right, that would be ignorant. However, in times when there have been entirely free markets, it hasn't worked out that well.
[QUOTE=s0beit;29077199]It just doesn't work in any real sense.[/QUOTE]
Need I really point to countries where socialized medicine has turned out better than many other nation's systems?
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29077753]Anyone with a work ethic can get a job today. People blame the economy for their own incompetence. I filled out TWO applications total, and I got a job for one and for the other I'm scheduling an interview with and might work there too/instead. And the job I currently got, I got the second I turned in my application. I walked in there, turned in my application and she's like "you have no work history?" and I was like "no ma'am, I haven't worked before" and she was like "when is the soonest you can start?" and I was like "anytime" and she put me to work the next day. It's minimum wage and part time, but it's a paycheck. People just need to make looking for a job, a job.[/QUOTE]
It depends where you live and what your financial condition is, and your financial state directly influencing how much education you get. So no, it isn't as simple "anyone who wants to work can work".
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29077710]Books are no more valid a resource than any equally credible resource on the internet.
In an argument, if you make a claim like you did, you have to actually back it up with something. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you, not me. It should not be my job to prove your point for you.[/QUOTE]
then explain how you could statistically prove in a mass-scale study with [b]conclusive[/b] evidence that people exploit social services rather than using it to better their own lives? let me tell you, its only proven through life experience.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. i could argue the same point about god and it would hold up strongly.
i suggest you abandon this close-minded point of view.
clearly, if you took a trip down to your local government-subsidized housing neighborhoods/projects youd find a lot of people who have no intention or ethic of advancing the quality of their lives. i know i have.
[QUOTE=amute;29077857]How fucking ignorant do you have to be?[/QUOTE]
You have a point. How ignorant [i]do you[/i] have to be?
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[quote][b]clearly, if you took a trip down to your local government-subsidized housing neighborhoods/projects youd find a lot of people who have no intention or ethic of advancing the quality of their lives. i know i have.[/b][/QUOTE]
This is what it all boils down to.
[QUOTE=Robbobin;29077880]What right does any man have to owning millions in the first place? Nobody's time is worth that much. Nobody makes that kind of money without exploiting a lot of people.[/QUOTE]
"prove it xd"
but really, life isnt fair. the social ladder is there for a reason.
if someone acquires that quantity of money through legal means then you have no right to direct how they use it, you manipulative fuck.
keep in mind that i use the term legal loosely.
Reading this thread is akin to bashing my head once on the wall for every post.
So far 479 bashes and counting.
[QUOTE=alucard_extreme;29077914]then explain how you could statistically prove in a mass-scale study with [b]conclusive[/b] evidence that people exploit social services rather than using it to better their own lives? let me tell you, its only proven through life experience.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. i could argue the same point about god and it would hold up strongly.
i suggest you abandon this close-minded point of view.
clearly, if you took a trip down to your local government-subsidized housing neighborhoods/projects youd find a lot of people who have no intention or ethic of advancing the quality of their lives. i know i have.[/QUOTE]
Can't stress this enough.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
