[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
Okay, maybe I’m out of line here, but being a Canadian living in the USA I have some difficulty understanding the GOP position. First off I don’t mean to offend - I’m just trying to understand. According to the Republican philosophy, illegal immigrants slipping through the system and getting healthcare is morally reprehensible, but the killing of innocent women and children in Iraq and Afganistan is acceptable collatoral damage? Does this seem like it makes sense to anyone?
So what if a few bad apples and get cared for if the majority of your countrymen can expect decent health care at an affordable cost. No system is perfect, but this fear over socialism and illegal immigrants seems irrational to me. I think Obama is trying to make the USA a better place for all its citizen’s - not just the well off. My two cents. I’ll shut up now.[/quote]
There’s nothing irrational about fearing socialism. What you see with American in regard to Iraq is us saying that collateral damage is acceptable in order to bring negative rights – liberty. With healthcare you are talking about giving away a product which can be provided only by attacking liberty. They are both at odds with each other.
That said, I don’t care if illegal immigrants get free health care if the money is going to forced from me without my consent. I figure we’re all equal in dignity and if we’re going to play the socialism game we may as well go all the way and give healthcare to anyone on our doorstep, citizen or no. “Give me your tired, hungry, poor, ect”.
Liberty or equality. You gotta pick one.
I think I’m siding with Patrick Henry on this one: “I know not course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death.”
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
In my opinion, the reason the US kicks ass is due to its diversity, innovative spirit, and hardworking attitude. The people I’ve met here are some of the hardest working people I know. Most of them have hearts as big as Texas and would give you the shirt off their backs if you asked. But this could very well be the nature of an American regardless of socialized medicine. It’s not the boogie-man its made out to be, is all I’m saying.[/quote]
Actually America is all these things because our spirit (at least the myth of America) is incompatible with socialism. Socialism demands the end of diversity and punishes hard work and individualism.
I really enjoy getting your responses, DD. They do make me think about my stance and I’ll give you credit, you can argue
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If the argument is that there isnâ??t a final bill yet, you cannot argue for it either.
[/quote]
This is correct. 100%. I’m not arguing for it. I’m arguing against an irrational, emotionally driven fear of a social project that could have great benefits for society as a whole. It has in many other countries. But there are MANY opponents who are simply putting their fingers in their ears and yelling socialism without trying to see the benefits. And the same can be said for some of the proponents.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Now youâ??re getting it. However:
Parks only infringe on right of property is it was forcibly take from a citizen.
[/quote]
What about the Native American? Did he have the right of property when his land was taken from him? My point is that no one truly owns the land. They only reside on it for a while until someone bigger/stronger/meaner takes it from him. What protects an individual from having his property taken? The state. But the world’s not perfect, and sometimes the state takes what it wants too. Liberty is a great concept, but not very realistic. No offense.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
And yes, I think most public works are a sham. There are very few things that I think the government MUST handle. Fire stations for example on the majority exist as voluntary forces with little or no public money (over 70% if memory serves). My dad happens to be a volunteer fireman and his stations only resources are donations and fund raisers. Itâ??s a myth that without forcibly taking peopleâ??s money things like public fire protection wouldnâ??t exist. It does already.
[/quote]
I think its a testament to the social nature of man to come together and support programs that help the group. But what if you didn’t donate? Should you still receive service if your house catches on fire? Some things are better if everyone chips in their fair share. I couldn’t imagine a world where this would be feasable for all public works. Some people are going to mooch off the system regardless.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Actually privatization almost always leads to higher efficiency and hence more to go around for all. I could afford to hire cops if I didnâ??t have to pay taxes for them and the service would probably be better and cheaper. I know thatâ??s an out there concept, but I believe free people to be capable of almost anything.
[/quote]
A privatized police force would invariably work nearly exclusively for the benefit of the corporations - not the citizens. Nazi Germany was like this. I think we could all agree that was a failure of Liberty. Or how about police for hire in China. The political-criminal-nexus is a example of capitalist interests controlling law enforcement in a communist nation. Not an ideal candidate for Liberty either.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Why must you limit a persons choice to purchase coverage for himself or his family(currently itâ??s illegal there)? To me THAT is unbelievable. Canadians made it illegal for a person to provide for themselves. What right does a government, or a majority, have to tell me I canâ??t enter into a contract with someone else to provide insurance for my loved ones? That one simple fact to me is a deal breaker no matter how great the rest of any plan looks or works.
You see things differently and thatâ??s fine, but Iâ??m trying to explain the American way of thinking. And thatâ??s the way a lot of people see it.
[/quote]
I’ll agree with you that I think it’s ridiculous that seeking private insurance is illegal. However, it’s not illegal to seek private care outside of Canada. And some people do. I would like to have that option available to all Canadians in Canada as well. However, a public system ensures that no one is left out.
In my opinion, the reason the US kicks ass is due to its diversity, innovative spirit, and hardworking attitude. The people I’ve met here are some of the hardest working people I know. Most of them have hearts as big as Texas and would give you the shirt off their backs if you asked. But this could very well be the nature of an American regardless of socialized medicine. It’s not the boogie-man its made out to be, is all I’m saying.
Actually America is all these things because our spirit (at least the myth of America) is incompatible with socialism. Socialism demands the end of diversity and punishes hard work and individualism.
mike[/quote]
I think you’re confusing socialism with communism. Hard work is not punished. Diversity can still exist. You still have the right to be an individual. You’re free to speak your mind. Free to assemble. Free to persue happiness.
I didn’t grow up with the concept of Liberty being taught to me, so forgive me if I seem a little dense about the subject. I’ve yet to hear a convincing arguement that having a publicly funded program for the benefit of the poorest of your countrymen is somehow infringing on Liberty. Social programs already exist in the US that don’t infringe on your right to be an individual, or to benefit from your hard work. How does this destroy Liberty?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Ninja, the outburst everyone is having a shit fit about was not about your big hearted citizens, it was about illegal immigrants. [/quote]
I understand that. I’m just a rabble-rouser by nature. However, it may be time for me to retire this debate. Thank you for your comments and for allowing me to express my opinion.
Cheers all.
By the way, I’m not an illegal immigrant. Just a temporary resident.
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
I really enjoy getting your responses, DD. They do make me think about my stance and I’ll give you credit, you can argue
DoubleDuce wrote:
If the argument is that there isn�¢??t a final bill yet, you cannot argue for it either.
This is correct. 100%. I’m not arguing for it. I’m arguing against an irrational, emotionally driven fear of a social project that could have great benefits for society as a whole. It has in many other countries. But there are MANY opponents who are simply putting their fingers in their ears and yelling socialism without trying to see the benefits. And the same can be said for some of the proponents.
[/quote]
I am personally against socialized anything regardless of benefits.
I think we can all agree taking native American land was a violation of their rights. Which is exactly my point. Even if people want or vote for things the government doesnâ??t have the right to do certain things no matter what public support says. I donâ??t believe the government has the right to take my money and spend it as it sees fit on healthcare, even if the money provides for me. Liberty is more than an ideal or there is no difference between here and communist china.
I also disagree with the way you think about the state. This state is nothing more than an abstract construct for a group of individuals that make decisions and commit actions. The â??stateâ?? never stormed someoneâ??s house with guns drawn to imprison someone for not paying taxes. Individual people do. Assigning the moniker â??stateâ?? to these actions seems for some reason to validate actions that would not be tolerated of individuals. I simply donâ??t believe in this. Our government is granted itsâ?? rights by the individual citizens, and as such it cannot have any authority the individual does not. This limits the governmentâ??s role to the protection of negative rights. Demanding positive rights is mutually exclusive with negative rights. YOU CANNOT HAVE BOTH. An individual doesnâ??t have the right to assign positive rights and by transference they cannot grant the government that authority.
Socialism is a system that grants positive rights and, as required, deny negative ones. Hence, Iâ??m against it at every turn. I think it is morally wrong. To accept it would be immoral in my eyes regardless of benefits.
Is it more fair for a group of people with guns to go house to house and collect money for a fire station regardless of the residents wishes and deciding â??appropriateâ?? amounts to take based on the group considers fair while taking some of the money back to their house for their unrelated pet projects and giving the resident no real input on how that money is spent to provide the fire protection?
The corporations in Nazi Germany WERE the government they had authority through the government and trade guilds that were NOT free market forces.
And government run things in china arenâ??t any better.
You didnâ??t think it would work for fire stations a few minutes ago and it absolutely does.
You never know.
[quote]
DoubleDuce wrote:
Why must you limit a persons choice to purchase coverage for himself or his family(currently it�¢??s illegal there)? To me THAT is unbelievable. Canadians made it illegal for a person to provide for themselves. What right does a government, or a majority, have to tell me I can�¢??t enter into a contract with someone else to provide insurance for my loved ones? That one simple fact to me is a deal breaker no matter how great the rest of any plan looks or works.
You see things differently and that�¢??s fine, but I�¢??m trying to explain the American way of thinking. And that�¢??s the way a lot of people see it.
I’ll agree with you that I think it’s ridiculous that seeking private insurance is illegal. However, it’s not illegal to seek private care outside of Canada. And some people do. I would like to have that option available to all Canadians in Canada as well. However, a public system ensures that no one is left out.[/quote]
My point is that it isnâ??t your right to decide those options for other individuals.
In my opinion, the reason the US kicks ass is due to its diversity, innovative spirit, and hardworking attitude. The people I’ve met here are some of the hardest working people I know. Most of them have hearts as big as Texas and would give you the shirt off their backs if you asked. But this could very well be the nature of an American regardless of socialized medicine. It’s not the boogie-man its made out to be, is all I’m saying.
Actually America is all these things because our spirit (at least the myth of America) is incompatible with socialism. Socialism demands the end of diversity and punishes hard work and individualism.
mike
I think you’re confusing socialism with communism. Hard work is not punished. Diversity can still exist. You still have the right to be an individual. You’re free to speak your mind. Free to assemble. Free to persue happiness.
I didn’t grow up with the concept of Liberty being taught to me, so forgive me if I seem a little dense about the subject. I’ve yet to hear a convincing arguement that having a publicly funded program for the benefit of the poorest of your countrymen is somehow infringing on Liberty. Social programs already exist in the US that don’t infringe on your right to be an individual, or to benefit from your hard work. How does this destroy Liberty?[/quote]
Keep in mind that socialism FORCES one man to serve another through taxation, then redistribution. Taxation puts a claim on part of a man’s lifespan. After all, the man has had to use his time (something we only have a limited amount of before we’re dead) to produce those taxes. To add further insult, he watches it redistributed away. Often enough, to people who expect a whole hell of alot more out of everyone else, than they do of themselves. Also, in these discussions I’ve noticed that I’m to be forced into responsibility for the needy, but they have no responsibility towards me.
How could I possibly be considered free in such a system? They have laid claim to part of my life.
In my opinion, the reason the US kicks ass is due to its diversity, innovative spirit, and hardworking attitude. The people I’ve met here are some of the hardest working people I know. Most of them have hearts as big as Texas and would give you the shirt off their backs if you asked. But this could very well be the nature of an American regardless of socialized medicine. It’s not the boogie-man its made out to be, is all I’m saying.
Actually America is all these things because our spirit (at least the myth of America) is incompatible with socialism. Socialism demands the end of diversity and punishes hard work and individualism.
mike
I think you’re confusing socialism with communism. Hard work is not punished. Diversity can still exist. You still have the right to be an individual. You’re free to speak your mind. Free to assemble. Free to persue happiness.
I didn’t grow up with the concept of Liberty being taught to me, so forgive me if I seem a little dense about the subject. I’ve yet to hear a convincing arguement that having a publicly funded program for the benefit of the poorest of your countrymen is somehow infringing on Liberty. Social programs already exist in the US that don’t infringe on your right to be an individual, or to benefit from your hard work. How does this destroy Liberty?
Keep in mind that socialism FORCES one man to serve another through taxation, then redistribution. Taxation puts a claim on part of a man’s lifespan. After all, the man has had to use his time (something we only have a limited amount of before we’re dead) to produce those taxes. To add further insult, he watches it redistributed away. Often enough, to people who expect a whole hell of alot more out of everyone else, than they do of themselves. Also, in these discussions I’ve noticed that I’m to be forced into responsibility for the needy, but they have no responsibility towards me.
How could I possibly be considered free in such a system? They have laid claim to part of my life.[/quote]
No, they have laid claim to all of it, because they decide how much you get to keep.
In my opinion, the reason the US kicks ass is due to its diversity, innovative spirit, and hardworking attitude. The people I’ve met here are some of the hardest working people I know. Most of them have hearts as big as Texas and would give you the shirt off their backs if you asked. But this could very well be the nature of an American regardless of socialized medicine. It’s not the boogie-man its made out to be, is all I’m saying.
Actually America is all these things because our spirit (at least the myth of America) is incompatible with socialism. Socialism demands the end of diversity and punishes hard work and individualism.
mike
I think you’re confusing socialism with communism. Hard work is not punished. Diversity can still exist. You still have the right to be an individual. You’re free to speak your mind. Free to assemble. Free to persue happiness.
I didn’t grow up with the concept of Liberty being taught to me, so forgive me if I seem a little dense about the subject. I’ve yet to hear a convincing arguement that having a publicly funded program for the benefit of the poorest of your countrymen is somehow infringing on Liberty. Social programs already exist in the US that don’t infringe on your right to be an individual, or to benefit from your hard work. How does this destroy Liberty?[/quote]
They do exist yes. Other than that I disagree with pretty much all of it.
Progressive taxation and â??trickle upâ?? economics, welfare, est. do reward unproductively and punish productivity. The only question being how much. Itâ??s also important to note that this doesnâ??t directly dictate decisions (you can still do what you want with the money they let you keep). They absolutely diminish your benefit from hard work.
â??Free to persue happinessâ??
I could have bought a car (or nicer house, or vacation, or saved more for retirement, est.) that would have made me happy had they not taken my money to pay for entitlements, social security, est. Does that not infringe on my happiness? Since when does taking someoneâ??s property not infringe on your rights. If I were to go steal your new porche and replace it with a clunker or in some other way forcibly downscale your lifestyle, I didnâ??t infringe your rights? Mind if I take your wallet? Everyone here voted for it so you have no choice.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Actually, I think it’s a good start. The republicans need to do more to speak out against losing our country. Jefferson would have been proud of this act. Congress is like a bunch of drones stuck in a MATRIX movie. We must always question our leaders…always, and when it stops, we have ripped the final strand that holds our founding values.
Like it or not, the time for being “courteous” or “politically correct” need to be put in the past. These values and now demonstrated by congress with all the ball slobbering and worshipping we see in there today.
While it was not the best time or place, I don’t think this will hurt him. I think this will elevate him actually as a fighter from the right.[/quote]
If for no other reason, these people need to be yelled at because the American people need to rediscover their own worth. We cow before authority and seek out nobility among people from politicians to celebrities. It’s about time we start saying, “What makes you so much better than me?!” To everyone from our neighbor to our president. We need to stop looking for leaders and start becoming our own fucking leaders.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
I’m still waiting for someone to provide facts and proof that the health care bill does in fact cover illegal immigrants. After all,that is why Mr.Wilson called Obama a liar.[/quote]
Judge Napolitano explained it on FOX a little while ago. The reason why he is lying is because what Obama proposed would be a violation of constitutional law. There have been two decisions in the federal courts where California tried do what Obama is proposing and the court said they can’t do that because the constitution says you can’t treat one group differently from the others.
Napolitano also said that as a lawyer Obama should know that.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
I’m still waiting for someone to provide facts and proof that the health care bill does in fact cover illegal immigrants. After all,that is why Mr.Wilson called Obama a liar.
Judge Napolitano explained it on FOX a little while ago. The reason why he is lying is because what Obama proposed would be a violation of constitutional law. There have been two decisions in the federal courts where California tried do what Obama is proposing and the court said they can’t do that because the constitution says you can’t treat one group differently from the others.
Napolitano also said that as a lawyer Obama should know that. [/quote]
The more you hear him, the more you realize that he is kind of a weak-willed naif, being led around by Nancy and the tribe of psycho-libs.
