Starrfall on 6/9/2008 at 03:32
Quote Posted by heretic
Ignoring the fact that European economics differ greatly from ours here in Americaland - (if I'm not mistaken you are Belgian or some such?)
How many employees do you have?
If you have any (employees), what benefits are you required to give them?
What percentage of your overhead covers these expenses, wage/benefits wise?
Exactly how much more of your bottom line could you afford to lose?
You realize you're asking him for far more economic detail than republicans ever deign to give when whining about how the little guy will perish under the devastating burden of american taxes.
Fafhrd on 6/9/2008 at 03:32
Quote Posted by theBlackman
ensure a level playing ground for all
You really don't think health care falls under this category?
paloalto90 on 6/9/2008 at 04:16
If the govt is supposed to ensure you have all your needs,where does the pursuit of happiness come in?What are you pursuing exactly?The liberty part is generally thought to mean a restriction on the powers of govt.over individual lives.
theBlackman on 6/9/2008 at 04:46
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
You really don't think health care falls under this category?
No!
The phrase has to do with the opportunity to aim for and work for your goals without being hampered by artificial restrictions imposed by others who don't think the way
you do.
Equal employment opportunity, equal pay for equal work etc. Equal opportunity to educate yourself. Equal treatment by law enforcement. Equal opportunity to have and raise a family in the religion of your choice, etc.
We are NOT EQUAL. Regardless of the rhetoric. Zacheuss is better educated than me, Joni Mitchell is a better songstress than me, and so on. We all have skills and weaknesses, none of us are Equal.
But we have the right to expect an equal opportunity to rise or fall on our own merits.
Everything else, outside of freedom of "the pursuit" of happiness, the right of personal privacy, the right to worship as we choose, and those few other items the Constitution holds dear, are "Priviledges", not rights.
Proper medical care is not a right, proper food and housing is not a right. The
opportunity to seek these and use them when we find them is.
Once born you have the right to all the air you can breathe. The rest is your right to pursue, but not automatically your right to
have.
Muzman on 6/9/2008 at 05:36
Regardless of the rhetoric indeed.
Fafhrd on 6/9/2008 at 05:39
Quote Posted by theBlackman
The phrase has to do with the opportunity to aim for and work for your goals without being hampered by artificial restrictions imposed by others who don't think the way
you do.
If I become injured or ill to a degree that inhibits my ability to work for my goals, and am unable to receive medical treatment because I don't have enough money to pay for it,
that is an artificial restriction imposed by others. There is NO LOGICAL REASON for health care to be as expensive in this country as it is. Maybe it doesn't have to be FREE, but it sure as shit has to be cheap enough that a person working a minimum wage job can get a broken bone set, or get immunisations for their kids, or antibiotics for themselves, or life saving surgery (food for thought: What would've happened to GBM if he'd been living in the States when his appendix ruptured a few years ago?), without incurring crippling debt or bankruptcy.
And this doesn't even begin to address the fact that most epidemics that threaten EVERYONE begin in low income areas that don't have access to proper health care. Providing a standard of health for the entire country is good for everyone.
For all your talk about helping other people and putting money where their mouth is, you seem quite happy to let a sizable percentage of the population go down the shitter for no reason other than "OH NO TAXES! GUB'MINT BAD!!"
theBlackman on 6/9/2008 at 06:17
[Sarcasm mode] Very rational last sentence.[/end sarcasm mode]
I never said "no taxes Gub'mint bad".
I welcome your thoughts, but not when you use my mouth to put words in.
Having lived through periods of "Poverty" in Ghettos in my youth and early teens, I been there, done that, and know that short of being blind, crippled, mentally deficient, people can do for themselves if they want to, and if such an atmosphere is in the surrounding environment.
As for the cost of medical treatment. That's a function of government interference, corporate profit interest, and a general lack of the real meaning of the Hippocratic Oath in the views of many doctors. If the shoe fits, wear it. Otherwise it obviously doesn't apply to you -that's a generic you-),
Some pay the price of all the years for the purpose of actually helping the patients. Many do it simply for the money. Being in it for the money the aid is slow in coming or non-existant unless the facility is guaranteed payment for treatment. Medicines dispensed from many hospital pharmacies are extremely overpriced. Much more than thier cost factor. With minor exceptions, hospital pharmacies should dispense to patients at a near cost factor, instead of a 200 to 400 percent increase, but I digress.
heretic on 6/9/2008 at 06:22
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
Ensuring the standard of living of the people is literally what the role of the Government, not the individual, is.
Not only is that is some of the scariest and most naive shit I've ever read on this fine forum, but a surer path to servitude I've never dared imagine.
...and government intervention (in the way of forced policy) which removed the patient as the prime purchaser in the medical market is what led to this mess in the first place.
Our health care system
is in crisis, but socialization is not the only solution worth looking into, if indeed it is to even be considered a solution at all. It's no secret where I stand on that, but that's beside the point.
theBlackman and paloalto allready hit the nail on the head, but I guess self-reliance is quickly becoming out of fashion.
Tonamel on 6/9/2008 at 08:07
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
Bullshit. I, as a human, should not be
personally ensuring the standard of living for everyone.
Of course not. You should be ensuring the standard of living for
yourself (and your dependants). Why should you expect anyone else to make your life cozy for you? And of course if you want to help others, you can, but it shouldn't be expected or required. Of anyone.
For a country as large and populous as the USA, the government only has two necessary functions: 1) to handle interstate issues/crimes, and 2) to protect the nation from foreign threats.
Much more than that, and it becomes stretched too thin, the federal workers can't communicate with each other effectively, and it most likely becomes an easily exploited bureaucratic mess.
This is why driver's licenses are issued by the state, and not the nation, and (partly) why the national ID is being met with such opposition. Certain things just shouldn't be handled at the national level. There are too many people, and too many various regions that each have their own needs. You can't please everyone.
Personally, I think the situation changes depending on how many people you're dealing with. The smaller the focus, the further left I tend to lean, while at the national level, I obviously have more libertarian preferences.
Apologies for any lack of coherency, it's 4am :bored:
D'Juhn Keep on 6/9/2008 at 08:42
Quote Posted by heretic
Not only is that is some of the scariest and most naive shit I've ever read on this fine forum, but a surer path to servitude I've never dared imagine.
Yes, we in Europe are quite the indentured servants and ALL BECAUSE OF THE NHS :mad:
I seriously seriously don't understand how having a basic provision of healthcare guaranteed to everyone is so fucking scary to you.
