The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Citizens Should Work and Pay a Tax to Qualify for Universal Healthcare [SPLIT]

Benvolio said:
You've never even seen thrashing, much less done it; or barn raising, house raising, or church raising. And your father did not split the crops equally with those who did not work.
Click to expand...

I've done all of those, whether he has or not. And I didn't split anything with anyone, I did it as part of the community.

Except the threshing we did to experience how hard it used to be just to get the material for making bread; it wasn't really being productive.
 
Benvolio said:
Thresher, its called combining. The few threshing machines left are museum pieces. Corn also is combined. It is not called threshing.
Click to expand...

Well, to begin with, I was speaking of the past when I referred to threshing... in order to demonstrate America's socialist history. You are the one who shoved it into the present.

The English noun "commonwealth" in the sense meaning "public welfare; general good or advantage" dates from the 15th century. The original phrase "the common-wealth" or "the common weal" (echoed in the modern synonym "public weal") comes from the old meaning of "wealth", which is "well-being", and is itself a loose translation of the Latin res publica (republic). The term literally meant "common well-being". In the 17th century the definition of "commonwealth" expanded from its original sense of "public welfare" or "commonweal" to mean "a state in which the supreme power is vested in the people; a republic or democratic state". "Better things were done, and better managed ... under a Commonwealth than under a King." Pepys, Diary (1667)
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth


Not only do you not know what Commonwealth means....you don't even have a clue what Republic means.

You have just exposed a new level of ignorance.
 
Kulindahr said:
This is the myth the SCOTUS perpetuated in Citizens United, that anything but human beings have speech.

Corporations do not engage in speech, only human beings do. What lobbying is in reality is a group of people in charge of other people's money using some of that money to hire other people to speck for the individuals in charge of that money, without asking the people whose money it really is. This is theft of speech. It continues to occur because people are very sloppy thinkers and many allow the nonsense that "corporations are people".
Click to expand...
The people making the decisions for the corporation are elected by the shareholders, and empowered to speak on behalf of the group. Speaking for the corporation is no more theft than deciding whom to hire or what product to invest in. Shareholders expect the officers and board to protect the interests of the corporation by informing the politicians of the adverse or positive effect of legislation on the interests of the shareholders and the corporation. Shareholders who disagree can vote them out or sell their shares.
 
Kulindahr said:
LOL

I've only visited ranches where a combine is used for harvesting, and I know better.
Click to expand...
Ranches raise cattle. What kind of ranchers talk about "threshing"? I don't believe you have visited "ranches" where they talk about "threshing".
 
Benvolio said:
Ranches raise cattle. What kind of ranchers talk about "threshing"? I don't believe you have visited "ranches" where they talk about "threshing".
Click to expand...

Your whole threshing nonsense is based on a total misapprehension of the point that was being made about the historical demonstation of socialism in the last few centuries in America. It doesn't matter if I have done. It doesn't matter if anyone else here has done it. Historically, many farming communities had communal threshing days because it was cheaper for all of them to do so and many hands made lighter work. Just like in the past, communities got together to raise barns and build rural churches and community buildings.

Even when I was growing up, the community came together to help build the addition to the community hall.

I don't know if you confused the point being made intentionally or whether you were just simply unable to grasp it.

I would also note that for every time you cite the story of the failure of one early pilgrim settlement, I could cite communities like the Shakers that thrived and prospered and in fact, contributed many important inventions.

Shakers won respect and admiration for their productive farms and orderly communities. Their industry brought about many inventions like Babbitt metal, the rotary harrow, the circular saw, the clothespin, the Shaker peg, the flat broom, the wheel-driven washing machine, a machine for setting teeth in textile cards, a threshing machine, metal pens, a new type of fire engine, a machine for matching boards, numerous innovations in waterworks, planing machinery, a hernia truss, silk reeling machinery, small looms for weaving palm leaf, machines for processing broom corn, ball-and-socket tilters for chair legs, and a number of other useful inventions.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers
 
Benvolio said:
Ranches raise cattle. What kind of ranchers talk about "threshing"? I don't believe you have visited "ranches" where they talk about "threshing".
Click to expand...

Amusing though the arguments about definitions are, it's not really adding to the original debate.

Back to the original debate... I'd like to know how children would be able to work and pay sufficient taxes to pay for their healthcare under your scheme? How would somebody who's an elderly widow past working age pay?
 
Are there no prisons?

Are there no workhouses?

scroogebw.gif
 
Kabluey said:
Amusing though the arguments about definitions are, it's not really adding to the original debate.

Back to the original debate... I'd like to know how children would be able to work and pay sufficient taxes to pay for their healthcare under your scheme? How would somebody who's an elderly widow past working age pay?
Click to expand...

We of course have Medicaid for that purpose.
 
If you had universal health coverage, you wouldn't need Medicaid. Win-win.
 
Don't confuse Benvolio with logic.

The wall of his cranium may not be able to withstand the stresses.
 
Benvolio said:
No. Charity is entirely consistent with capitalism.
Click to expand...

Except medicaid is not charity. It is social service, a stop-gap effort to ensure those who can't afford necessary medical care have access to it...... A bit of socialism hiding in plain sight in the middle of capitalism.
 
Benvolio said:
No. Charity is entirely consistent with capitalism.
Click to expand...

Medicaid is not charity. The government does not provide charity. It provides tax funded services.

Medicaid is universal health care for selected classes of citizens.

Wow.
 
Benvolio said:
No. Charity is entirely consistent with capitalism.
Click to expand...

Willie Boy said:
Except medicaid is not charity. It is social service, a stop-gap effort to ensure those who can't afford necessary medical care have access to it...... A bit of socialism hiding in plain sight in the middle of capitalism.
Click to expand...

Kabluey said:
But it's paid for by taxes...
Click to expand...

rareboy said:
Medicaid is not charity. The government does not provide charity. It provides tax funded services.

Medicaid is universal health care for selected classes of citizens.

Wow.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose, in Ben's worldview (a Militant-Capitalist-Protestant, though he recently said he were NOT "Christian") this particular Christian term "charity" is matching:

Social Insurance/Social Security/etc. (the entire Welfare/Commonwealth complex) is NOT the individual's RIGHT in his POV, NOR is it society's/community's OBLIGATION; in his POV, it's: an act of grace.
 
That is what this tread is about. Start at the beginning again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top