Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,596,838 times
Reputation: 9169
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manimuni
They took the penalty because, despite how draconian it IS, they penalty was actually more affordable than the coverage. People couldn't afford it. It was literally like paying a second mortgage for MANY people. Very cruel to force people to pay their hard-earned money.
If the Republicans hadn't strongarmed, we could have had the public option.
Where did you get the idea that 'conservatives' want to cut off paying for public schools? Personally I think a lot more kids should be homeschooled, and that the public school system needs a major overhaul, but I have never heard anyone wanting to cut off funding the public school system.
And if what you are really talking about is post-secondary education .. perhaps you think that students should go for free (tuition, room and board, books, student activity fees .. the whole shebang)? .. well, public universities DO get financial help from the government as far as I am aware. Didn't they give you your piece of that? With the kind of $ going in and the poor results coming out in most cases it seems, I think the government should probably demand that students only take certain courses (no more SJW type majors) or we cut them off .. but that should be a reasonable request.
I'm not going to get into it point by point, but I will say that I am not one of those people against the wishes of the baker in the cake situation. I do feel businesses have the right to refuse service, it's not smart, but they have the right. And in regards to health insurance and social security, you give people way too much credit. Most people are dumb with money and can't budget worth horsepoop. So the masses do need a little protection from themselves.
When it comes down to liberal vs conservative, liberalism tends to be much more against choice than conservatism.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,596,838 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aery11
Where did you get the idea that 'conservatives' want to cut off paying for public schools? Personally I think a lot more kids should be homeschooled, and that the public school system needs a major overhaul, but I have never heard anyone wanting to cut off funding the public school system.
The "libertarian" wing of the Republican party wants public schools dismantled because "theft", "competition" and all the other buzzwords.
Where did you get the idea that 'conservatives' want to cut off paying for public schools? Personally I think a lot more kids should be homeschooled, and that the public school system needs a major overhaul, but I have never heard anyone wanting to cut off funding the public school system.
I'm very much in favor of public education administered on the local level.
This is a serious question. Considering conservatives are against minimum wage, against redistribution of wealth, against the commons (i.e. publicly funded things like police, schools, fire, etc), against unions, against healthcare. Really, what are they 'for'? And don't use the old personal responsibility line, because that isn't the question.
They think they are "financial islands", and also that they got theirs, screw everybody else.
No, the PPACA is only viewed as a failure because it was still forced to rely on the private market, and not everyone paid in, quite a few paid the penalty instead of getting insurance. A real nationalized system works much better than the PPACA
The bolded text is the problem with nearly all US redistribution schemes: Not everyone pays in.
FWIW, social democracy countries (such as those which have national health care, etc.) DON'T do it that way.
Read and learn:
Quote:
"The United States has by far the most progressive income, payroll, wealth and property taxes of any developed country. Scandinavian social democracies like Denmark, Sweden and Norway have quite regressive direct taxes, as do the Netherlands and Switzerland...
The disparity is even starker when you bring sales taxes into the mix, as VATs are an extremely important source of revenue for most European countries...
Prasad and Deng found that the progressivity of countries' tax codes is negatively correlated with the amount of redistribution they do. In English: The less progressive the [tax] code, the more progressive the system."
Pay close attention to what that scatter plot chart tells us... Note that the highest levels of government benefits and services are provided by countries (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Belgium) in which taxes are flat (everyone pays the same tax rate) or regressive (shown as the negative values, meaning a greater tax burden is placed on those with lower incomes). And note where the USA falls on the graph. The USA has the most progressive tax system and therefore is least able to fund progressives' societal goals because the tax base is too narrow, and therefore generates insufficient tax revenue.
(Scatter Plot info, for those who need more explanation of what Scatter Plots tell us: Scatter Plots - Math is Fun)
Again, conflating education or healthcare with a mansion or a Ferrari is just stupid. Plus, society benefits from smart healthy people.
You can't force people to be either of those things. If you don't believe me just look at people. They already do give food away in the form of food stamps and it doesn't mean people make healthy choices. Education can't make anyone smart if they just aren't. And how would that work anyway? Would it be free for as many times as it takes for someone to pass? Free for as many degrees as you want?
The "libertarian" wing of the Republican party wants public schools dismantled because "theft", "competition" and all the other buzzwords.
Competition ≠ dismantling. Why do you believe public schools shouldn't competitively offer the best education for the $$$$$ they receive?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
