In the US we believe that being poor is immoral. If you are poor, you deserve the deprivation that comes with it. You are poor due to your own fault. We will help you, but only if it means you bother the rich less. We want you to live in designated areas, use separate services for all things, and keep your nasty kids away from ours.

In other countries they believe in helping their fellow man and bringing up living standards for everyone in the country and other bullshit like that.

At some point, our government absolutely MUST take responsibility for this problem, even if it means higher taxes. Boo hoo! And yes, to resurrect the tired fire truck analogy, here it is: there are MANY aspects of American society which are socialized, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Fire services, police services, public libraries, even the post office: we pay for these with our FEDERAL taxes even if we don’t use them regularly. It is a public service for the public good. Nearly every country on earth includes health care among its public amenities, and the U.S. is light years behind them. I’m not sure what “separation of powers” has to do with anything, despite your strange and convoluted thesis on that topic. (Seriously, I went to law school and everything, yet I’m scratching my head trying to decipher that.)

And a word of advice: Personal attacks against others do not advance your argument. In fact, they make you look you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Also, please please PLEASE learn how to spell correctly. Not knowing the difference between “its/it’s” and “to/too” makes me want to gauge my eyes out with hammers. You’re a walking poster child for No Child Left Behind.

Peace out and merry Christmas.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/32825

Libertarian Reluctantly Calls Fire Department

CHEYENNE, WY—After attempting to contain a living-room blaze started by a cigarette, card-carrying Libertarian Trent Jacobs reluctantly called the Cheyenne Fire Department Monday. “Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free-market fire-fighting service, the fact is that expensive, unnecessary public fire departments do exist,” Jacobs said. “Also, my house was burning down.” Jacobs did not offer to pay firefighters for their service.

“over and over” Ok then prove it.

Sure you can look at New Orleans and other “Disasters” over the past 6-7 years, but I would blame that on the people running the government, not the institution itself.

There is good government and bad government, but to get rid of ALL government, just because some of it is bad, is rather foolish don’t you think?

Some examples of good government that come to the top of my head: NASA, the WPA, the TVA, FAA, etc.

“I care not to help build the roads in California, that should be Californian’s job.”

So then you’re an anti federalist / states rights proponent then?

So if California highways say, I-5 for example, are important NATIONAL corridors, you see the responsibility resting on Californias shoulder for maintenance of that corridor, even though it may be extremley important to Washington, Oregon and the southwest in general to maintain that highway?

“The income tax doesn’t make up the bulk of tax revenue for the USA, so if you were to cut spending, you could get rid of the income tax while putting more money into people’s pockets, and helping drive the insurance rates down by offering lower rates. more people buying insurance, lower price goes.. free market economics.”
 

So you lower taxes on people who make very little money to begin with, and they still can’t afford insurance premiums. I suppose that’s their problem, and they should die in the streets?

“Again, you are misrepresenting my position. I never said any of this. Of course they have a responsibility to their community! I only object to my kids footing your children’s medical bills. Obviously you don’t have a problem handing them your bills.”

So if one of your children decides to become a school teacher, or a social worker, or some other low paid profession, and they can’t possibly afford good “free market” medical coverage, and they get cancer and need an expensive operation to live, you don’t think society had an obligation to help your child? Is it tough luck? they just weren’t “responsible” enough to get a higher paying position in a higher paying field, so too bad?  

how much will this cost?? are you taking into account financial crisis?? do you understand monetary policy and how to affects everything??

Actually according to a lot of research, Universal Healthcare could save not billions, but TRILLIONS of dollars in just 10 years, does this interest you? do you understand monetary policy and how it effects everthing?

http://pressesc.com/news/2688/18122007/universal-health-coverage-could-save-1-5-trillion-10-years

“But the only reason you can’t understand the core issue is because you are naive to the facts. The governmental involvement has not helped the industry, and it has driven up prices. If you knew one thing about HMOs you would know that the government does a horrible job at this kind of stuff.. they do it for far to much money, and it’s never efficient.”

So in your book, Government just plain sucks, it’s just… terrible… always has been, always will be. That’s the difference here Bryan, you think Government, by it’s defintiion just plain SUCKS. I think government can be great, if run competently, which thoughout history it has been for the most part (the last 6-10 years not withstanding).

“but whatever, you socialist types don’t care if you subject others to having to pay to support your lively hood. You feel that everyone owes you something, and that it is somehow everyone else’s responsibility for you your whole life. It’s actually kind of pathetic”

Actually what’s pathetic is that you’re still tooting that line in 2007. What’s next, are you going to call me a “red” or a “Comie”? Please share your domioe theories and red scare bullshit with the rest of us.

“And that is really the difference.. you feel like government is there to take care of you your entire life, and I feel like government is a body that is suppose to protect my individual freedoms, and not govern ever aspect of commerce, health care, freedom, and our privacy. I’m sorry that a concept that promotes privacy, and freedom from some legislative body far away telling you what you have to do with the fruits of your labor is foreign to you. What ashame!”

I don’t believe that all, but as you drank the Libertarian Coolaid you obviously believe anyone who thinks good government is possible is one of them thar “Socialist bum” types.

“Thomas Jefferson said, “I can predict future happiness for americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” he also said, “government is best when it governs the least..””

Sure, lets go back to Jeffersons time where only the elite were educated, children toiled in factories, people really did die on the streets, and if you wanted medical care, well then you better be able to afford a doctors house call. yea.. wow.. that would be swell.

“You see an America where it’s every man for himself, Fuck your community, fuck your neighbor, fuck the greater good.”

No, i never said that.. i only object to the federal government playing that role. I would rather the local/state governments handle this issue. The Fed only botches things up, and this can be proven over and over. HMO’s for one.

“Other people see an America where we’re all in this together, striving for a better today and tommorow.”

I see that too, and we contribute to this common good by paying local taxes, and helping out local communities. I care not to help build the roads in California, that should be Californian’s job.

“In YOUR America, there would be no income tax, which of course means there would be no things like Interstate Highways, NASA, Public Education, and so on.”

The income tax doesn’t make up the bulk of tax revenue for the USA, so if you were to cut spending, you could get rid of the income tax while putting more money into people’s pockets, and helping drive the insurance rates down by offering lower rates. more people buying insurance, lower price goes.. free market economics.

“In YOUR America, as you say “I don’t feel comfortable selling out my kids, and making them liable for YOUR kids in 20 years.” You don’t think you, nor your children have any responsibility, economic or otherwise, to your local community.”

Again, you are misrepresenting my position. I never said any of this. Of course they have a responsibility to their community! I only object to my kids footing your children’s medical bills. Obviously you don’t have a problem handing them your bills.

“Fortunatly most people don’t share your vision, the era of Victorian Sweetshops, child labor, and poor people dying on the streets is something most people find abhorant and are not willing to go back too.”

Wow, what a ridiculous characterization of my views. None of this of course would be a reality, but i think your attempt to demonize my view was kinda cute!

Look, i just don’t feel like my kids should have to pay your kids medical bills. It’s really simple. I don’t feel comfortable sticking them with a bill that has to be paid with a blank check.. how much will this cost?? are you taking into account financial crisis?? do you understand monetary policy and how to affects everything??

“And to the topic of Ron Paul, while he may have it 100% right on foreign affairs, I can’t support a guy who see’s no problems with people dying because they were not “Responsible” enough to have a better job to pay higher insurance premiums to a a health insurance company that wouldn’t fuck them on a needed operation.”

But the only reason you can’t understand the core issue is because you are naive to the facts. The governmental involvement has not helped the industry, and it has driven up prices. If you knew one thing about HMOs you would know that the government does a horrible job at this kind of stuff.. they do it for far to much money, and it’s never efficient.

but whatever, you socialist types don’t care if you subject others to having to pay to support your lively hood. You feel that everyone owes you something, and that it is somehow everyone else’s responsibility for you your whole life. It’s actually kind of pathetic, because you want the government to take care of you from cradle to grave.

And that is really the difference.. you feel like government is there to take care of you your entire life, and I feel like government is a body that is suppose to protect my individual freedoms, and not govern ever aspect of commerce, health care, freedom, and our privacy. I’m sorry that a concept that promotes privacy, and freedom from some legislative body far away telling you what you have to do with the fruits of your labor is foreign to you. What ashame!

Thomas Jefferson said, “I can predict future happiness for americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

he also said, “government is best when it governs the least..”

The world back then was much more oppressive that it is now, but Ronald Reagan said, “Freedom is never more than ONE generation away from extinction.”

I am only following the advice of wiser men who came before me. If only you would listen to what they had to say. They lived under the tyranny of the King George, and knew more about what can happen if liberty isn’t carefully preserved.

John Adams said, ” Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge amongst the people.”

Subverting our constitution and letting the federal government take more power will only lead to another King George situation. The constituion was set up to prevent this from happening again. That is why we have separation of power. Ron wants to take all the power that Bush had the republican congress grant him, and give it back to congress. If that power is not taken from the president, a dictator could come in and use it, and we will be screwed! How’s take for “taking care of your local communities..” because if a president were to ever abuse the power that Bush has at this very moment.. universal health care would be the last thing on your mind.

seriously, you need to think about what is important. separation of power. individual freedom, and liberty. If these 3 elements are respected, then we can retain the things that made this country great.

Well that pretty much sums it up Bryan.

You see an America where it’s every man for himself, Fuck your community, fuck your neighbor, fuck the greater good.

Other people see an America where we’re all in this together, striving for a better today and tommorow.

In YOUR America, there would be no income tax, which of course means there would be no things like Interstate Highways, NASA, Public Education, and so on.

In YOUR America, as you say “I don’t feel comfortable selling out my kids, and making them liable for YOUR kids in 20 years.” You don’t think you, nor your children have any responsibility, economic or otherwise, to your local community.

Fortunatly most people don’t share your vision, the era of Victorian Sweetshops, child labor, and poor people dying on the streets is something most people find abhorant and are not willing to go back too.

“It is absolutely a ridiculous concept to think that I would want to subject my children to a world where they have to be responsible for YOU.”

It’s sadly apparent that you want your children to grow up in a world where they are not responsible for anyone except themselves, I’m sure you’re hoping they grow up with a “FUCK THEM” attitude like you’ve aquired, however Darwin does tricky things when it comes to how kids turn out, if there’s any Karma in the world your kids will turn out being hippy tree-hugging social workers.

I’m done with my input on this topic, it’s apparent you have a very cold absolutist view of the world, and there’s nothing I’m going ot say to change that.

And to the topic of Ron Paul, while he may have it 100% right on foreign affairs, I can’t support a guy who see’s no problems with people dying because they were not “Responsible” enough to have a better job to pay higher insurance premiums to a a health insurance company that wouldn’t fuck them on a needed operation.

That’s YOUR America, not mine.

You see, obviously, you don’t know shit about the country, because according to the constitution, the federal government has no right/authority to redistribute my wealth (or lack thereof) to you. When I pay my local/state taxes for the police/fire service in my area, the money is not redistributed to other individuals in other parts of the country. It isn’t the same thing, so look..

I know that you aren’t to bright, so let me explain.. you are using a straw man argument.. that means that you are intentionally misrepresenting my position, so you can discredit the misrepresentation, and then you yourself proclaim victory, without really addressing the substance of my argument.. maybe you’re dumb, maybe you are just lazy.. I don’t know, but your view that the federal government has the right to go into people wallets and take money out to give to you, so you can go to the doctor.. well, let’s just be honest here.. you’re a free loader, and you are just looking for a handout, so you have no problem voting in something who doesn’t care about things like individual liberty or personal freedom. This attitude on your part will lead us down a road where one day the Federal government will be to big for it’s britches (it already is), and we will suffer the same fate as Soviet Union, which is a budget that cannot be maintained, and a devalued currency that is worth nothing.

It’s hard to grasp concepts such as this when you understand next to nothing about monetary policy, and are only interested in pursuing your own selfish needs.

If you truly cared about helping people shown in the movie Sicko, then you would get the government out of the industry, because the failure of the HMO’s proves that federal government will be inept at administering universal health care.

Have you even looked at the budget deficits that we are running?? Affording a universal health care plan is impossible with current spending levels, a war, a bubble on the verge of busting, and an attitude that says we are not responsible for any of it. No, we would be better served examining our Monetary Policy, because that is what is at the root of all our problems.

We need to empower PEOPLE, not the government.

Our government is running wild, printing money left and right, bailing out this industry over that industry all with proceeds obtained by the taxpayers of America. They use our tax money to hand out favors to corporations in the form of earmarks, and no one seems to want to talk about it.
Hillary doesn’t talk about it, Obama doesn’t talk about.. they just want to push an unrealistic health care plan on us and our children, just so they can get elected.. They care not for the longevity of our country, and the value of our dollar.. When the bills come due for the health care that we can not afford, they will just get the Fed to authorize the mint to print more money out of thin air further debasing our currency, and putting our children even closer towards financial ruin.

The Fed can’t keep band aiding the economy with “liquidity injections,” which simply means that they have printed more money and handed it out.

Now, sitting a universal health care system on top of this broken picture will spell utter ruin.

Universal health care one day maybe, ok!! but it won’t be viable without sound currency! We need to get ron in there, so we can cut spending and level the government out, and then we can start trying to address the issue of health care, and like you said.. maybe the states would take on the responsibility.. California does it.. it’s not a federal program, so it doesn’t have to be federal. You also said that there wasn’t a big distinction between local taxes and federal taxes. Well, i can see why you have a hard time accepting what I have to say, and it is because you simply have no concept of what it means to hand over MORE power to Washington.

Allowing the Federal government to take over something that the states should be doing is a bad move, and goes against the concept of States Rights that is clearly addressed in the constitution. Government is suppose to be on the local level, not the federal level. It is much more easy for people to effect change in their area at the local level than at the Federal level, and this is why we need to keep as much power local as possible.

In our country right now, it is kind of backwards.. The Federal government gets around the concept of States Right by basically blackmailing the states by threating to pull federal funds if they do not comply with the federal governments wishes. This is how the federal government got all the states to lower the .BAC levels for drunk drivers to .08, by threatening to yank their highway funds.

We don’t need to Federal government having even more power to force their will on local communities. It might seem tempting to sell out our future for a little short term comfort, but we must think of the long term implications. By implementing universal health care, we are giving up our rights as a individual and putting ourselves into a position where we are dependent on the state. No, society would be much better off with the state OUT of our lives.

Now, the issues you have with the current government could easily be solved by a Ron Paul presidency, and you wouldn’t have some Nazi like Federal legislative body over your shoulder making sure you do it THEIR way.

what’s that line in the metallica song, “you can do it your own way, if it’s done just how I say..”

we don’t need that. The only way that would work is if you believe that the government always does things in the best interest of the people, well, government has proven themselves inept at doing this.

I would only support universal health care if I had an option to opt out of it; otherwise, it is an infringement on MY personal liberty by taking my hard earned money from me, through the unconstitutional income tax, and the redistributing the money to you and your family. This is clearly wealth redistribution, and it is a communist trait. We won the cold war, why should we become what we defeated?

no, this isn’t a communist country.. the constitution doesn’t have a provision that allows the federal government to tax me, and then give that money to you. period.

you can talk about how you think the constitution is a waste, but i happen to respect the document, because I know it is the foundation of what made this country great.

“If we accept that governments purpose to to promote a stable safe society, then I see no reason why providing for the health of it’s citizens,”

Well, i am glad that you don’t have a problem taxing other poor Americans like me, so you can go to the doctor.. glad that line of thought works for you, even if it goes against everything that made this country great. If you eyes, socialism is long overdue, huh.

Things like Fire trucks are paid for by local/state taxes. Universal health care would be paid for out of the FEDERAL budget, and I feel VERY uncomfortable granting the federal government any more authority to tax me, and screw things up anymore than they already have.

Besides, the movie Sicko proves that government is inept at handling health care.. take a lot at the HMOs.. do you actually need anymore proof?