Page 22 of 143 FirstFirst ... 1217181920212223242526273272122 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 440 of 2855
  1. #422  
    Entitlements are the bane of our society. With the nanny state providing for everyone, government just grows bigger, more powerful, and self-reliance is eaten away.

    Remember when the hurricane hit that big entitlement-based city, its residents screamed for government to come save them, they cried for taxpayer subsidized debit cards to abuse, they blamed and looted and wallowed. That is the effect of massive entitlements on our population. Meanwhile, in many neighboring areas, not driven by entitlements, where people are accustomed to taking care of themselves, folks simply dealt with the disaster, and silently rebuilt... by themselves... without all the juvenile behavior.

    When we keep looking to government for solutions, it means we are incapable of solving problems for ourselves. This hasn't always been the case; why is it now? Why are so many of us incapable of self-reliance?

    Government, of course, absolutely embraces increased dependency, because it means government must grow in strength and size to accommodate! Their media propaganda supports this by broadcasting emotionally manipulative messages - "universal" health care is, after all, best for the children and the elderly! We are taught, in government sponsored schools, that what used to be a privilege is now a "right."

    Of course, none of this can scale economically. Simply look at the financial situation in our country today, after a few short decades of massive entitlements. We cannot provide for every freeloader who makes it across our borders. Our government cannot buy its way out of debt, cannot tax its way out of the failed ponzi scheme that is social security, and will not see continued economic strength as foreign nations realize our short-sighted stupidity, and stop investing in us.

    What do we do? Big, new entitlements. That's the ticket! Because it'll help with your medical bills! What a joke. At some point, hopefully, we'll focus on the bigger picture, kill all these entitlements, and return to the basics. Unfortunately I think we're going to have to crash in a big way before the entitlement-minded get it.
  2. #423  
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson1900 View Post
    Remember when the hurricane hit that big entitlement-based city, its residents screamed for government to come save them, they cried for taxpayer subsidized debit cards to abuse, they blamed and looted and wallowed. That is the effect of massive entitlements on our population. Meanwhile, in many neighboring areas, not driven by entitlements, where people are accustomed to taking care of themselves, folks simply dealt with the disaster, and silently rebuilt... by themselves... without all the juvenile behavior.
    Of course. Why should they have expected the government to come save them? They should have just stayed there and died maturely when the entire city flooded, rather than expect the National Guard to offer help.

    After all, people shouldn't feel entitled to anything but liberty, pursuit of happiness, and....what what that other one again? It doesn't specifically say "and working levees".
    Last edited by Bujin; 07/18/2009 at 02:47 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  3. #424  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Of course. Why should they have expected the government to come save them? They should have just stayed there and died maturely when the entire city flooded, rather than expect the National Guard to offer help.

    After all, people shouldn't feel entitled to anything but liberty, pursuit of happiness, and....what what that other one again? It doesn't specifically say "and working levees".
    I think you missed the point of his story. People in the major city, who were accustomed to receiving benefits from the government kept waiting for their state and local governments to come to their aid yet again. However, the incompetent state system failed them. The mayor didn't even follow basic protocol in evacuating the city. So rather than following the lead of people in other states who began working together, the people in the major city waited and complained.

    And the levees are a brilliant example of a failed bureaucracy. Rather than spending the money on improving the levees, the local government spent it elsewhere (on projects that would attract votes and ensure their power)...then complained about the levees later, deflecting blame from it's true source.

    And people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, too many people want to take from other people's lives and liberty and say they have a "right" to it. And there are willing politicians who are more than happy to give them handouts because it gives them POWER. Bureaucrats may say they're ensuring a level playing field, but as Orwell said in Animal Farm, "...some...are more equal than others." Politicians gain incredible levels of power by pretending to help others. Look up all the perks Congressmen and Senators receive. Why, you could serve a couple years in the House and be locked in to a lifetime pension and free health care...all on the taxpayer's dime...for decades.

    Ask 100 politicians in Washington if they'll take part in the health care system they're proposing and I guarantee you that 99% of them will not...because they KNOW it's a bad system and they want no part of it, but they're still willing to force it on you. That's a key indicator that they're in politics for themselves rather than serving the people.
    Last edited by semprini; 07/18/2009 at 03:26 PM.
  4. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #425  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Of course. Why should they have expected the government to come save them? They should have just stayed there and died maturely when the entire city flooded, rather than expect the National Guard to offer help.

    After all, people shouldn't feel entitled to anything but liberty, pursuit of happiness, and....what what that other one again? It doesn't specifically say "and working levees".
    The government provided warning after warning after warning. The mayor enacted a voluntary evacuation order but practically begged people to evacuate. Later, he ordered a mandatory evacuation order and warned that if anyone stayed behind they were risking their lives. The government provided free transportation out of the area and, later, to the "refuges of last resort". It provided free shelter (albeit, not the best shelter but it was free). There wasn't a person alive who wasn't told it could be the hurricane of the Century.

    So, even after all those warnings, 60,000 people in the areas hit by the hurricane stayed behind and were stranded. Of those, the Coast Guard, many of whom lost their own homes and had their own families to worry about, rescued more than 35,000. Let me repeat that, the United States Coast Guard rescued 35,000 people from their rooftops and flooded homes after the hurricane. Many of those people were idiots! Able-bodied idiots who, by their stupidity, diverted the Coast Guard's resources from truly needy people.

    Afterwards, Congress approved $62 billion in assistance. FEMA supplied rental and living assistance and tens of thousands of trailers to hundreds of thousands of people. It also paid five months of hotel bills for over 12,000 people.

    Huge, devastating mistakes were made. There's enough blame to go around: from the Army Corps of Engineers who built the levees to FEMA who mismanaged some of the response effort, to the state and local governments who refused federal assistance. And, yes, even the people who stayed behind even after years of doubt about the levees, years of seeping ground water, and many, many warnings by both federal and local governments about Katrina.

    But to act like the Government did nothing is just wrong. And to act like the government can be the be-all and end-all for every natural disaster is equally wrong. In the end, as they say, **it happens. But ask yourself what would have happened in another country.
  5. #426  
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson1900 View Post
    Remember when the hurricane hit that big entitlement-based city, its residents screamed for government to come save them, they cried for taxpayer subsidized debit cards to abuse, they blamed and looted and wallowed. That is the effect of massive entitlements on our population. Meanwhile, in many neighboring areas, not driven by entitlements, where people are accustomed to taking care of themselves, folks simply dealt with the disaster, and silently rebuilt... by themselves... without all the juvenile behavior.
    I really wish people who only know what the mass media chose to highlight about Katrina would stop using it as an example for every ill in our society. OTOH, ironically, it shows one of the biggest potential pitfalls of government run health care. The real culprit in Katrina was the Corps (and lack of accountability in Congress). The levee systems were decades behind where they were supposed to be. You can place parts of the blame on corrupt or incompetent local, state, or federal officials, and yes, even some on those who instead of evacuating went to the 'shelters of last resort' or stayed in their homes. However, ultimately it was the poor decisions of the Corps that created Katrina.

    For all its bluster out in the Gulf, it was a relatively weak storm by the time it made landfall. The doomsday scenario has always been a slow moving medium strength (or higher) storm driving straight up Bayou Lafourche (the Betsy path). Katrina wasn't it. It turned further east and by the time it hit land, NOLA was only getting Category 1 or 2 conditions at worst. The levees should have laughed it off (like the ones in my home region did). Then it would have been ignored nationally much like Gustav was. There would have been a week or so without power for a lot of people and some wind damage to be dealt with, but no one would have noticed or cared much. However, due to the Corps compromises, the levees were poorly designed and maintained and not completed. And now for the tie in to health care...

    The kicker here is that there is going to be no real accountability. I mentioned this a couple years ago in a thread where Katrina came up, and was mocked by someone who pointed out that there was a lawsuit in progress. What they either ignored or were ignorant of was that the Flood Control Act of 1928 (and subsequent court rulings) exempts the Corps from any liability in such a case, and the case was eventually dismissed. I'm sure that any sort of government involvement in health care would be no different.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6. #427  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I really wish people who only know what the mass media chose to highlight about Katrina would stop using it as an example for every ill in our society. OTOH, ironically, it shows one of the biggest potential pitfalls of government run health care. The real culprit in Katrina was the Corps (and lack of accountability in Congress). The levee systems were decades behind where they were supposed to be. You can place parts of the blame on corrupt or incompetent local, state, or federal officials, and yes, even some on those who instead of evacuating went to the 'shelters of last resort' or stayed in their homes. However, ultimately it was the poor decisions of the Corps that created Katrina.

    For all its bluster out in the Gulf, it was a relatively weak storm by the time it made landfall. The doomsday scenario has always been a slow moving medium strength (or higher) storm driving straight up Bayou Lafourche (the Betsy path). Katrina wasn't it. It turned further east and by the time it hit land, NOLA was only getting Category 1 or 2 conditions at worst. The levees should have laughed it off (like the ones in my home region did). Then it would have been ignored nationally much like Gustav was. There would have been a week or so without power for a lot of people and some wind damage to be dealt with, but no one would have noticed or cared much. However, due to the Corps compromises, the levees were poorly designed and maintained and not completed. And now for the tie in to health care...

    The kicker here is that there is going to be no real accountability. I mentioned this a couple years ago in a thread where Katrina came up, and was mocked by someone who pointed out that there was a lawsuit in progress. What they either ignored or were ignorant of was that the Flood Control Act of 1928 (and subsequent court rulings) exempts the Corps from any liability in such a case, and the case was eventually dismissed. I'm sure that any sort of government involvement in health care would be no different.
    Uhhm... thanks for discussing causes, storm tracking, severity, and liability. I agree that health care does not tie into any of these. Now, if you'll put on your reading comprehension hat, and review my post, and you'll realize you responded to nobody... because I did not mention cause, tracking, severity, or liability.

    I brought up reaction to Katrina and the damage caused, and subsequent behavior, to illustrate what happens when society is entitlement-bred and entitlement-driven (as this is overwhelmingly the case in New Orleans). What happens is: people become helplessly dependent upon government. Perhaps you debate this? Feel free. Meanwhile, I contrast that against reaction in many areas outside of liberal New Orleans, areas which also took massive damage, but did not react with foolish, juvenile behavior. I was in one of these areas. We lost a lot of property. You didn't see us crying on the news, though, nor screaming for help, nor asking for government handouts. We rebuilt ourselves, because we know how, because we do not rely upon anyone else do to everything for us. We do not believe in entitlements, personally I don't want anything from the government. And that, my friend, is your tie in to the next big entitlement coming from our socialist friends in Washington: health care.

    So please, before you flame, try reading 101. It helps.
  7. #428  
    Quote Originally Posted by semprini View Post
    I think you missed the point of his story. People in the major city, who were accustomed to receiving benefits from the government kept waiting for their state and local governments to come to their aid yet again. However, the incompetent state system failed them. The mayor didn't even follow basic protocol in evacuating the city. So rather than following the lead of people in other states who began working together, the people in the major city waited and complained.

    And the levees are a brilliant example of a failed bureaucracy. Rather than spending the money on improving the levees, the local government spent it elsewhere (on projects that would attract votes and ensure their power)...then complained about the levees later, deflecting blame from it's true source.

    And people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, too many people want to take from other people's lives and liberty and say they have a "right" to it. And there are willing politicians who are more than happy to give them handouts because it gives them POWER. Bureaucrats may say they're ensuring a level playing field, but as Orwell said in Animal Farm, "...some...are more equal than others." Politicians gain incredible levels of power by pretending to help others. Look up all the perks Congressmen and Senators receive. Why, you could serve a couple years in the House and be locked in to a lifetime pension and free health care...all on the taxpayer's dime...for decades.

    Ask 100 politicians in Washington if they'll take part in the health care system they're proposing and I guarantee you that 99% of them will not...because they KNOW it's a bad system and they want no part of it, but they're still willing to force it on you. That's a key indicator that they're in politics for themselves rather than serving the people.
    Excellent comment: "And people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, too many people want to take from other people's lives and liberty and say they have a "right" to it." This is what truly bugs me about folks who believe they have a "right" to things and should have it provided by the "government". It's as if they forget that the "government" is funded by us. So while I believe everyone has a "right" to have access to health care, I don't believe that they have a "right" to pay for their care by the government taking my money to pay for it. I don't understand why people don't understand this. We should all have the "right" to many things....food, shelter, education, transportation, internet, health care, etc.....but what you don't have is a right to force me to fund your rights. Anyway.....that's all I got to say about that.
  8. #429  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Excellent comment: "And people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, too many people want to take from other people's lives and liberty and say they have a "right" to it."
    Well....if people are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then what could be more important or fundamental, then ones health?

    This is why we have "government." People don't want to live in a “state of nature” where “life would be nasty brutish and short.” Was that Hobbes or Locke? Anyway,
    I suppose there are still corners of the world where people can be “by themselves” and live “for themselves” Somalia comes to mind. But I look at it as just the price to pay for living in a civilized society.
    Last edited by Iago; 07/19/2009 at 08:19 PM.
    Iago

    "Good name in man and woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash . . . But he that filches from me my good name Robs me of that which not enriches him
    And makes me poor indeed."


    Criminal: A person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation.
    - Howard Scott
  9. #430  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    Well....if people are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then what could be more important or fundamental, then ones health?

    This is why we have "government." People don't want to live in a “state of nature” where “life would be nasty brutish and short.” Was that Hobbes or Locke? Anyway,
    I suppose there are still corners of the world where people can be “by themselves” and live “for themselves” Somalia comes to mind. Put I look at it as just the price to pay for living in a civilized society.
    Well.....this is just the fundamental difference between Liberals and Conservatives. Liberals believe that having a "right" to such things means that you tax certain people (the "wealthy") so that others can have these "rights." This is the classic "transfer of wealth" theory, also known as socialism. Conservatives believe that everyone should be able to have "access" to such rights, but it is not the government's (that is, the tax payers) role to take from one group to give to another group. The government should make sure that "we the people" cannot be denied access to these rights. We can write back and forth about this, but that is the basic difference. I will never change your mind on this and you will never change my mind.

    While some people may want to live in a society where everything is shared, many others have no interest sharing with those that don't pull their weight. I read the Pilgrims started out like that....everyone sharing each other's food, like a community garden.....until some started to feel they didn't have to pull their wieight and so the folks doing all the work decided to put an end to that. There will always be folks who have their hand out and expect something for nothing. There is a difference between those that truly need help, and those that simply want the easy road.

    This goes back to good ole Joe Biden's comment about it is our "patriotic duty" to want to pay our taxes. Do you pay extra taxes each year? You know you can...you can send in extra money if you want. I'm guessing you don't....so why don't you if it is a patriotic thing to do? Those that have the means to do so, and believe in sharing their wealth (actually, they really want others to share their wealth) should start volunteering to pay more and that could likely take care of those truly in need. Something tells me there won't be many liberals paying extra taxes.
  10. #431  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Well.....this is just the fundamental difference between Liberals and Conservatives. Liberals believe that having a "right" to such things means that you tax certain people (the "wealthy") so that others can have these "rights." This is the classic "transfer of wealth" theory, also known as socialism.
    No, you tax everybody. The wealthy are not the only ones who pay taxes. Also, either you have that
    "right" or you don't, which is it? And what good is having access or the "right" if you can't pay for it? What?..... is standing outside the hospital staring longingly at the hospital sign, or someone going in fortunate enough to have insurance, going to miraculously bring about a cure for someone suffering from an illness? And is money something you really ought to have on the forefront of your brain at that critical time?

    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    While some people may want to live in a society where everything is shared, many others have no interest sharing with those that don't pull their weight. I read the Pilgrims started out like that....everyone sharing each other's food, like a community garden.....until some started to feel they didn't have to pull their wieight and so the folks doing all the work decided to put an end to that. There will always be folks who have their hand out and expect something for nothing. There is a difference between those that truly need help, and those that simply want the easy road.
    We're talking about health care, not someone failing to pull their fair share of the weeds in a garden.
    What does pulling your weight have to do with being poor or sick anyway? Seems like you're passing judgment where there shouldn't be.

    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    This goes back to good ole Joe Biden's comment about it is our "patriotic duty" to want to pay our taxes. Do you pay extra taxes each year? You know you can...you can send in extra money if you want. I'm guessing you don't....so why don't you if it is a patriotic thing to do? Those that have the means to do so, and believe in sharing their wealth (actually, they really want others to share their wealth) should start volunteering to pay more and that could likely take care of those truly in need. Something tells me there won't be many liberals paying extra taxes.
    I didn't read about the comment, but I do believe it's a duty. Funny you should mention patriotism. To me, conservatives seem to be very unpatriotic.
    They talk a good game, always wrapping themselves in the flag, talking about family values this, working people that.....then when they get elected they do everything in their power to undermine the very people that put them into office.....But that's another post.
    Last edited by Iago; 07/19/2009 at 09:40 PM.
    Iago

    "Good name in man and woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash . . . But he that filches from me my good name Robs me of that which not enriches him
    And makes me poor indeed."


    Criminal: A person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation.
    - Howard Scott
  11. #432  
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson1900 View Post
    Uhhm... thanks for discussing causes, storm tracking, severity, and liability.
    LOL...you really didn't read for comprehension yourself, did you?
    I agree that health care does not tie into any of these.
    Actually, it does tie in to health care, were you not paying attention?
    Now, if you'll put on your reading comprehension hat, and review my post, and you'll realize you responded to nobody... because I did not mention cause, tracking, severity, or liability.
    And if you actually had a salient point, you'd realize that I did respond to your 'point'. It was a complete non sequitur since it was based on a political interpretation of media coverage and not based in reality. Further, if you were actually reading for comprehension, it was also an indictment of the 'liberal' view that the Debbul republicans were to blame for harming those poor souls in New Orleans.
    I brought up reaction to Katrina and the damage caused, and subsequent behavior, to illustrate what happens when society is entitlement-bred and entitlement-driven (as this is overwhelmingly the case in New Orleans).
    No, you brought up your political view of the problems with society and tried to use media coverage regarding Katrina to justify them. My point was that you are sorely misinformed.
    What happens is: people become helplessly dependent upon government. Perhaps you debate this? Feel free.
    You really aren't paying attention.
    Meanwhile, I contrast that against reaction in many areas outside of liberal New Orleans, areas which also took massive damage, but did not react with foolish, juvenile behavior. I was in one of these areas.
    Really? Which one? How soon were you in NOLA after the storm to observe anything other than the mass media coverage? You seem to know the real people there so well.
    We lost a lot of property. You didn't see us crying on the news, though, nor screaming for help, nor asking for government handouts.
    What property did you lose? What people were asking for government handouts on the news? You'll have to forgive my ignorance here since I didn't have power for a week afterwards and spent the following six months or so actually helping people in the area rebuild their businesses.
    We rebuilt ourselves, because we know how, because we do not rely upon anyone else do to everything for us.
    Cher, I know the areas surrounding NOLA intimately. You've been sold a bill of goods. A few people on the news doesn't make a city.
    We do not believe in entitlements, personally I don't want anything from the government. And that, my friend, is your tie in to the next big entitlement coming from our socialist friends in Washington: health care.
    LOL....What office are you running for (or is it a talk radio spot)?
    So please, before you flame, try reading 101. It helps.
    Cher, you're an amateur at knowing flaming. I read your screed for what it was. Just as purely political bull**** as the criticisms of Bushie after Katrina. If you were any good at reading, you'd realize that you're not dealing with a liberal or entitlement sympathizer. When you get to the graduate level reading classes, then we can talk.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12. #433  
    Quote Originally Posted by nelson1900 View Post
    Uhhm... thanks for discussing causes, storm tracking, severity, and liability. I agree that health care does not tie into any of these. Now, if you'll put on your reading comprehension hat, and review my post, and you'll realize you responded to nobody... because I did not mention cause, tracking, severity, or liability.

    I brought up reaction to Katrina and the damage caused, and subsequent behavior, to illustrate what happens when society is entitlement-bred and entitlement-driven (as this is overwhelmingly the case in New Orleans). What happens is: people become helplessly dependent upon government. Perhaps you debate this? Feel free. Meanwhile, I contrast that against reaction in many areas outside of liberal New Orleans, areas which also took massive damage, but did not react with foolish, juvenile behavior. I was in one of these areas. We lost a lot of property. You didn't see us crying on the news, though, nor screaming for help, nor asking for government handouts. We rebuilt ourselves, because we know how, because we do not rely upon anyone else do to everything for us. We do not believe in entitlements, personally I don't want anything from the government. And that, my friend, is your tie in to the next big entitlement coming from our socialist friends in Washington: health care.

    So please, before you flame, try reading 101. It helps.
    Beautiful.
  13. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #434  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    Well....if people are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then what could be more important or fundamental, then ones health?
    I think that might be stretching the meaning a bit. When you take it from its negative context wherein we have the right to not have out lives unjustly taken from us to the positive context wherein we not only have the right to life, but also certain qualities of life, it can be used to justify almost any sort of entitlement.

    This is why we have "government." People don't want to live in a “state of nature” where “life would be nasty brutish and short.” Was that Hobbes or Locke? Anyway,
    I suppose there are still corners of the world where people can be “by themselves” and live “for themselves” Somalia comes to mind. But I look at it as just the price to pay for living in a civilized society.
    It's ironic that you quote Hobbes in your retort. Hobbes summed up that natural state of man, that "brutish and short" life, as such: "the state of men without civil society (which state may be called the state of nature) is nothing but a war of all against all; and that in that war, all have a right to all things."

    It's ironic because Hobbes believed this would also be the end result of democracy.
  14. Cookedart's Avatar
    Posts
    39 Posts
    Global Posts
    69 Global Posts
    #435  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You're absolutely correct. The fact that our system is based on individual rights (and states rights) DOES differentiate us from many/most democratic industrialized countries.
    One could argue that government run healthcare is based on the fact that every individual has the right to health care, therefore being based on individual rights., or put another way, the right of every individual.

    What I find shocking about the political debate in this country is the polarizarion and oversensationalism of both camps. The left practically asserts that the insurance companies have never treated a single person without profit, and the right would claim that a government run system would signal the rise of an orwellian control system where the government would control the health and wellbeing of every citizen.

    The fact is, both systems exist in democratic nations around the world. Both systems work. I think it is a decidedly good thing for any nation to be continually evaluating how its health care system is operating, and it is good to hear of obama's administration bringing up such a dialog. I am too used to hearing about how everything that is happening in america is infallible, and it is somehow weak to analyze what makes other countries successful.
  15. #436  
    Toby, you are Katrina God. All of you may say nothing about Katrina without Toby, chief authority on all things Katrina, sighing over your stupidity (flame), seizing your foray to unload his deepest, most irrelevant Katrina dreams (point), then expertly tying them into (joke) whatever unimportant topic you were discussing. As the omniscient-topic poster; if we happen upon one of your topics, we must be prepared for denigration after diatribe... for having the gall ever to mention it without consulting you first. And if your "I'm the authority" game should be exposed, that criminal who did so will get twenty lashings and your line-by-line attention!

    Please, not every mention of Katrina needs be your opportunity to deride. Sometimes, your political opinion does not matter; it was your method of injecting it that earned my response. So I'll take being added to your long list of everyone who is "misinformed" as an honor. Thank you. If you would like to continue your Katrina interrogation of me, refer me to your Katrina forum, I'll sign up, and there you can demonstrate your expertise all over me.
  16. #437  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    No, you tax everybody. The wealthy are not the only ones who pay taxes. Also, either you have that
    "right" or you don't, which is it? And what good is having access or the "right" if you can't pay for it? What?..... is standing outside the hospital staring longingly at the hospital sign, or someone going in fortunate enough to have insurance, going to miraculously bring about a cure for someone suffering from an illness? And is money something you really ought to have on the forefront of your brain at that critical time?
    Well, it does depend on which tax I'm talking about. You are right, everyone pays sales taxes, but to say everyone pays Federal taxes is just not accurate. I would say 40-45% of workers pay $0 or close to $0 in Federal Taxes. The bill in the House has couples making over $350,000 paying a 1% "surcharge" (also known as a tax), those over $500,000 a 3% surcharge, and those over $1,000,000 something like a 5.4% surcharge. And you know that will only increase in the future as not many taxes go away or down. How is that "everyone"?

    As for having access, most people could afford some type of catastrophic plan like the HSA plan that I have. I have no physician co-pays and no prescription card, but I know that I will not lose my house or my retirement assets because my loss is capped at $4,000. I went this direction to save premium dollars. So, everyone should have the right to access to this type of plan. Why should some be required to pay for plans for others that are possibly better than the plan they have themselves? I understand that some people don't even have the $4,000 I mentioned as my cap, but at least this is better than staring at a $50,000 bill and can be reasonably paid over time.


    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    I didn't read about the comment, but I do believe it's a duty. Funny you should mention patriotism. To me, conservatives seem to be very unpatriotic.
    They talk a good game, always wrapping themselves in the flag, talking about family values this, working people that.....then when they get elected they do everything in their power to undermine the very people that put them into office.....But that's another post.
    Paying taxes is your duty? Fine....I think you should up your patriotism and give more to the government. Will you commit to doing this? I'm not talking about the goof heads that get elected....I'm talking about regular people who are out here working. I just happen to believe that the charities that I give to will do a better job with the money than the government. Do you really believe the government does a good job with our money? Really? If you do, I'll say it again, grab a flag, be a patriot, and pay more taxes when you file your tax return.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #438  
    Quote Originally Posted by semprini View Post
    And the levees are a brilliant example of a failed bureaucracy. Rather than spending the money on improving the levees, the local government spent it elsewhere (on projects that would attract votes and ensure their power)...then complained about the levees later, deflecting blame from it's true source.
    This is exactly what is happening with the "stimulus money" we've already pissed away. Rather than focusing and applying these funds on projects that would stimulate jobs and the economy, states are diverting them to bolster failing projects and other budget "shortfalls" within their decaying systems.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #439  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    This is why we have "government."
    This, sir, is the crux of our argument. Where does it say, in our constitution, that the Government is our nanny? You guys want mamma government nurturing and controlling evey aspect of your lives... and I think you may get your wish, if Obama gets his "changes" passed.

    I'm too old to move to Australia and start over, but then again....
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #440  
    Quote Originally Posted by cookedart View Post
    One could argue that government run healthcare is based on the fact that every individual has the right to health care, therefore being based on individual rights., or put another way, the right of every individual.
    They could argue that, and they'd be wrong. Just like they could argue that every person deserves a car, or a roof over their head. This argument misses my point, however. What's at stake here is choice - the right to choose, and it runs the gamit: whether or not to have healthcare; if so, which plan is right for me and my family; and what are my health treatment options.

    Your attempt to drive it to an argument over whether or not people should have healthcare is just silly. Thats not the issue. If I'm against Obama's policy, I must be against people having healthcare, right?
    I think it is a decidedly good thing for any nation to be continually evaluating how its health care system is operating, and it is good to hear of obama's administration bringing up such a dialog.
    I agree with the "continually evaluating" part, but he's more than raised a "dialog". He's threatening to take control over an industry that accounts for 1/6th of the US economy. And he's wanting to RAM it through as quickly as possible. Some favor he's doing us. Don't you think this should be considered carefully?
    I am too used to hearing about how everything that is happening in america is infallible, and it is somehow weak to analyze what makes other countries successful.
    Where did you hear that everything that is happening is America is infallible? And you believed them, so now you're dissappointed?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

Posting Permissions