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

[Benvolio]

You described free markets, then went into reciting propaganda. You didn't say anything about capitalism.

You claim to be a lawyer, and all the evidence is against it. You claim to understand capitalism, but all the evidence is against it. You claim to be a conservative, but there's a heck of a lot of evidence against that.

I do not agree with your ideosyncratic definitions of capitalism and conservatism, freedom of speech. About 350 million Americans and the USSipreme Court disagree with your bizarre notion of freedom of speech.

 

[Kabluey]

I do not agree with your ideosyncratic definitions of capitalism and conservatism, freedom of speech. About 350 million Americans and the USSipreme Court disagree with your bizarre notion of freedom of speech.

Idiosyncratic?
Did you even reread the bizarre rant you'd contributed that he'd responded to. You unleashed a tirade of barely legible jingoism that was way off topic.

Why do you insist on trying to assign rights based on tax-payer status when you are opposed to taxes.
Would you like to pay zero taxes and therefore also have zero access to everything provided by government?

 

[Willie Boy]

Lobbying is a political right. As such, it applies only to individuals.

Yet it is done by corporations. At least the corporations hire the professional lobbyists who then lobby on their behalf.

 

[rareboy]

The reason for the great success of capitalism is that if people work hard for their own benefit and that of their family, it ultimately benefits all of society. Self interest is the great motivator and altruism very little. Capitalism exploits self interst for the benefit of all. Socialism discourages hard work and innovation by appropriating the results.

Jesus Christ this just screams stupid.

Socialism does not discourage hard work. In fact, it ensures that hard work by the many is rewarded and that the standard of living and quality of life for the commonwealth is elevated.

Again, it is clear in every post that you write on this subject that not only do you know and understand nothing about socialism, but that you are willfully ignorant and obtuse about the subject as well.

 

[Benvolio]

Jesus Christ this just screams stupid.

Socialism does not discourage hard work. In fact, it ensures that hard work by the many is rewarded and that the standard of living and quality of life for the commonwealth is elevated.

Again, it is clear in every post that you write on this subject that not only do you know and understand nothing about socialism, but that you are willfully ignorant and obtuse about the subject as well.

The socialist maxim is "from each according to ability, to each according to need." Sure, it encourages hard work verbally, but the reward is spread around to others. Equality is the goal of socialism.

 

[Kabluey]

The socialist maxim is "from each according to ability, to each according to need." Sure, it encourages hard work verbally, but the reward is spread around to others. Equality is the goal of socialism.

Equality could only sound like a bad thing to the terminally selfish.

The problem with non-universal healthcare is that simple survival competes with profit.

An ideal society would see people helping each other in times of need, donating to worthy causes and working for a common good. Selfish jerks and those who wish to discriminate are the only problem with that ideal.

Taxation solves that by forcing even the tightest, meanest, most prejudiced individuals to contribute to the running of their community. They complain bitterly, naturally, because of that inherent selfishness.

 

[TX-Beau]

Equality could only sound like a bad thing to the terminally selfish.

The problem with non-universal healthcare is that simple survival competes with profit.

An ideal society would see people helping each other in times of need, donating to worthy causes and working for a common good. Selfish jerks and those who wish to discriminate are the only problem with that ideal.

Taxation solves that by forcing even the tightest, meanest, most prejudiced individuals to contribute to the running of their community. They complain bitterly, naturally, because of that inherent selfishness.

I keep telling y'all that this type of argument bounces off Ben because he KNOWS some kinds of people simply do not deserve help or health because they all have very deep tans - now if you tried to take Social Security away from the baggers he'd have a conniption.

Charity, compassion, kindness, these things don't belong to the horde

 

[smokeshadow]

Yet it is done by corporations. At least the corporations hire the professional lobbyists who then lobby on their behalf.

Lobbying is also done by professional organizations on behalf of their representative organizations. I.E. The American Institute of Architects lobbies in Washington (and state capitals) on behalf of architects. The AMA lobbies on behalf of doctors. And so on. These professional organizations are typically composed of people who are educated in the practice of their profession and should know what they are talking about to legislatures. I suspect that if you ask your typical Senator or Congressman who was better entitled to design and oversee the construction of a new 250,000 square foot corporate office building, an architect or an engineer, couldn't articulate reasons for one or another. These professional organizations are their to help "educate" (and, of course, argue in favor of their particular profession) the legislator. To imply that all lobbyists are inherently evil or bad is just wrong!

 

[jbrown329]

Fine. Lobby away. But, NO MONEY to get what they want.

 

[Kabluey]

Lobbying is also done by professional organizations on behalf of their representative organizations. I.E. The American Institute of Architects lobbies in Washington (and state capitals) on behalf of architects. The AMA lobbies on behalf of doctors. And so on. These professional organizations are typically composed of people who are educated in the practice of their profession and should know what they are talking about to legislatures. I suspect that if you ask your typical Senator or Congressman who was better entitled to design and oversee the construction of a new 250,000 square foot corporate office building, an architect or an engineer, couldn't articulate reasons for one or another. These professional organizations are their to help "educate" (and, of course, argue in favor of their particular profession) the legislator. To imply that all lobbyists are inherently evil or bad is just wrong!

The interests of those professional organizations are pretty much drowned out by lobbyists with competing interests.

Pharma, insurance and electric utilities are the three biggest spenders on lobbying in the USA. They're defending turf, not gently shaping safety standards.

 

[Willie Boy]

To imply that all lobbyists are inherently evil or bad is just wrong!

I didn't imply that. I only stated that there were lobbyists for corporations pushing for laws/regulations favorable to those corporations. The implication is that many of THOSE lobbyists are willing to go farther than mere lobbying on their group's behalf and that bribes and "gifts" are also applied. My post was in response to the suggestion that only individual citizens were allowed to lobby.

 

[jbrown329]

I didn't imply that. I only stated that there were lobbyists for corporations pushing for laws/regulations favorable to those corporations. The implication is that many of THOSE lobbyists are willing to go farther than mere lobbying on their group's behalf and that bribes and "gifts" are also applied. My post was in response to the suggestion that only individual citizens were allowed to lobby.

And here's a damn good example.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_Abramoff

 

[smokeshadow]

I didn't imply that. I only stated that there were lobbyists for corporations pushing for laws/regulations favorable to those corporations. The implication is that many of THOSE lobbyists are willing to go farther than mere lobbying on their group's behalf and that bribes and "gifts" are also applied. My post was in response to the suggestion that only individual citizens were allowed to lobby.

Willie - wasn't implying you were making that point. My response was simply to show that many who imply that lobbyists are bad and work only for corporations fail to realize that professional organizations are lobbies, organizations like the NRA, FFA, NFL, NCAA, etc. are lobbies, as are the ones that we usually lump together as "lobbyists". Sorry to imply otherwise.

 

[Willie Boy]

Willie - wasn't implying you were making that point. My response was simply to show that many who imply that lobbyists are bad and work only for corporations fail to realize that professional organizations are lobbies, organizations like the NRA, FFA, NFL, NCAA, etc. are lobbies, as are the ones that we usually lump together as "lobbyists". Sorry to imply otherwise.

It may not have been your intention to imply it, but the way your post was formatted, with that sentence lumped into the same paragraph that was a response to my post did imply it.

 

[frankfrank]

The socialist maxim is "from each according to ability, to each according to need." Sure, it encourages hard work verbally, but the reward is spread around to others. Equality is the goal of socialism.

Quotation from Karl Marx.

Jesus Christ.

Don't you even know the difference between socialism and Marxism (communism)?

BUSTED.

 

[Kabluey]

Quotation from Karl Marx.

Jesus Christ.

Don't you even know the difference between socialism and Marxism (communism)?

BUSTED.

He tries to claim they're the same.
Just like tea party conservatives dislike being called KKK (in public).

Awful to know that in order to harm minorities, some people will even jeopardise their own health.

 

[otters]

The reason for the great success of capitalism is that if people work hard for their own benefit and that of their family, it ultimately benefits all of society. Self interest is the great motivator and altruism very little. Capitalism exploits self interst for the benefit of all. Socialism discourages hard work and innovation by appropriating the results.

Sputnik Crisis!

View attachment 1143142

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_system#International_comparisons

 

[rareboy]

Quotation from Karl Marx.

Jesus Christ.

Don't you even know the difference between socialism and Marxism (communism)?

BUSTED.

OF course he doesn't know the difference.

That is glaringly obvious in all of his posts.

 

[rareboy]

 

[Benvolio]

Equality could only sound like a bad thing to the terminally selfish.

The problem with non-universal healthcare is that simple survival competes with profit.

An ideal society would see people helping each other in times of need, donating to worthy causes and working for a common good. Selfish jerks and those who wish to discriminate are the only problem with that ideal.

Taxation solves that by forcing even the tightest, meanest, most prejudiced individuals to contribute to the running of their community. They complain bitterly, naturally, because of that inherent selfishness.

Remember this when you pretend that socialism/liberalism/communism are not related. They all stem from the notion that people can work for altruism as well as for self interest. Actually, in the earliest days, the Pilgrims attempted a communal system with people working the same land and sharing the harvest. It didn't work, as reported by Governor Bradfor in "Of Plymouth Plantation"http://www.governmentalwaysfails.com/thanksgiving-pilgrims-rejected-socialism-in-favor-of-private-enterprise/

"The less industrious members of the colony came late to their work in the fields, and were slow and easy in their labors. Knowing that they and their families were to receive an equal share of whatever the group produced, they saw little reason to be more diligent their efforts. The harder working among the colonists became resentful that their efforts would be redistributed to the more malingering members of the colony. Soon they, too, were coming late to work and were less energetic in the fields.

As Governor Bradford explained in his old English (though with the spelling modernized):

“For the young men that were able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children, without recompense. The strong, or men of parts, had no more division of food, clothes, etc. then he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labor, and food, clothes, etc. with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignant and disrespect unto them. And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc. they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could man husbands brook it.”

To their credit, the colonists finally realized their error and changed course. In their third year at Plymouth, the colonists re-introduced private property, and allowed families to keep or trade whatever surplus they produced. As a result, conditions for the colonists improved significantly. As Governor Bradford recorded in his diary

By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God. And the effect of their planting was well seen, for all had, one way or other, pretty well to bring the year about, and some of the abler sort and more industrious had to spare, and sell to others, so as any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day."

Human nature has not changed, but liberals never learn. This time, it really, really will work.