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.
I don't mind sharing if it is voluntary... but if it is FORCED, I have to ask, what's in it for me? What do I get out of it other than holding the bag...
A nice warm feeling of doing good. Don't you feel better now?
Oh and I will be taking a bit more this time, you see I was screwing off this weekend and didn't get around to taking care of my responsibilities so I will be relying on you to carry me.
That's a bad analogy. This implies that being healthy is not a right (yet in the Declaration of Independence we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness).
A bad GPA doesn't mean that you will have a horrible life. I've known many people that went on to have great lives with relatively lower college GPAs. However, our current healthcare system impairs the rights stated on the Declaration of Independence.
A good GPA is obviously not a right. The ability to live (and live healthy) is a right.
You have the right to liberty as well though right?
Ok lets look at the definition of it.
Quote:
lib⋅er⋅ty
–noun, plural -ties.
1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.
6. freedom or right to frequent or use a place: The visitors were given the liberty of the city.
7. unwarranted or impertinent freedom in action or speech, or a form or instance of it: to take liberties.
Ok, I removed some that were less relevant, but feel free to add them back if you think they are.
So essentially liberty is the right to do many things based on your choice correct? Would you agree?
more specifically I think number 3 nails it:
Quote:
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
Ok, now lets go back to the whole thing.
"right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"
Can one cancel out the other? Can the pursuit of happiness cancel out liberty? For instance, if it would make me happy to put you in chains and have you work in my backyard. Is that a conflict?
What if it would make me happy to take your life (not seriously, just speaking academically). Would that be my right?
So you are saying it would conflict with the others right? I couldn't make you a slave, because it would infringe on your right to liberty. I can't take your life because you have a right to your life. Would that be correct?
Ok...
How about this. Can I in the pursuit of my happiness and my right to life, take away your liberty which is:
Quote:
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
in order to improve my own health?
It appears that just like the first couple of examples, we have a conflict do we not?
So we have a right to all of those, but not at the expense of limiting or removing the right of another to those? Would that be correct?
So how can we use the "right to life" as justification in removing the other two be it through forced taxation, servitude, or restriction of individual choice?
The answer.
You can't.
Take them all, or leave them all. They come as a package deal.
Religion Anthrolpology:A-
Spanish: A-
World Music: A+
Political Ideology: B+
DAMN POLITICS! Oh well. Maybe next semester I can get all A ranges.
Where is the:
Math (At least calculus)
Physics (calculus based)
Chemistry
Logic (specifically, not a side focus such as eastern philosophy)
You have to get those in somewhere. Even if they are elective general ed. Honestly, I think it should be a requirement for all university level education to require those topics with any major.
Now do those and then get back to me on how you would like to share your grade. Those topics you have to work for.
My math and physics classes had a 60% failure rate. Sharing my grades which I bled through to earn is not even a consideration.
I wonder how all the hardworking students would feel if we passed a law forcing them to give up a fraction of their GPA to subsidize the GPA of those who didn't work as hard.
One of the many flaws in your arguement is that those without health insurance don't work as hard as those with health insurance.
Have you ever seen some of the conditions many of these people DO work under? Many standing on cold cement floor 8 hours a night, having to keep on their coats because it is so cold in the shop, hands cut to ribbons from winding wires or frost bit from keeping them in water as they clean poultry. Back screaming in pain, two 10 minute breaks a day, no paid sick days, no paid vacations, and no health care insurance. There are millions of U.S. citizens working under these or worse conditions all the time. But, in your mind, they are "slackers" while the guy sitting in a nice comfortable office and playing golf with the customers is a hard worker who deserves health care.
Of course, your response will be that those people are not worthy because they should have gone to college so they didn't have to work those jobs. Well, keep in mind that those people were working those jobs while the person in college was sitting in a warm classroom, partying with their friends all weekend,and "finding themselves." Not everyone has equal opportunity and someone has to work those jobs.
Whether cleaning toilets, working in unsafe factories, clerking at the 711 and risking hold-ups, taking care of other people's children, harvesting our food in the beating sun, or any of thousands of other hard, hard jobs you would never do, there a millions without health care that are so far from slackers that you wouldn't last a day doing their hard work.
One of the many flaws in your arguement is that those without health insurance don't work as hard as those with health insurance.
Have you ever seen some of the conditions many of these people DO work under? Many standing on cold cement floor 8 hours a night, having to keep on their coats because it is so cold in the shop, hands cut to ribbons from winding wires or frost bit from keeping them in water as they clean poultry. Back screaming in pain, two 10 minute breaks a day, no paid sick days, no paid vacations, and no health care insurance. There are millions of U.S. citizens working under these or worse conditions all the time. But, in your mind, they are "slackers" while the guy sitting in a nice comfortable office and playing golf with the customers is a hard worker who deserves health care.
Of course, your response will be that those people are not worthy because they should have gone to college so they didn't have to work those jobs. Well, keep in mind that those people were working those jobs while the person in college was sitting in a warm classroom, partying with their friends all weekend,and "finding themselves." Not everyone has equal opportunity and someone has to work those jobs.
Whether cleaning toilets, working in unsafe factories, clerking at the 711 and risking hold-ups, taking care of other people's children, harvesting our food in the beating sun, or any of thousands of other hard, hard jobs you would never do, there a millions without health care that are so far from slackers that you wouldn't last a day doing their hard work.
No, not slackers, but they choose to "stay" there.
Before you jump to conclusions, I worked those types of jobs in my past. I read books to increase skills that would allow me to get better paying jobs. Once I made better money, I paid myself through school.
There is nothing wrong with those who do work those jobs, but there is something wrong with those who work them and never make efforts to move out of them if they are concerned about the level of condition their work is.
When it comes down to it, the result is the choice of the individual.
And by the way, your argument is an emotional appeal, not a valid position in the issue.
Someone's hardship does not justify the forcing of others. That is... involuntary servitude.
My response would be that a progressive tax system is fair, that the more capable have a responsibility to help the less capable, and that society has a responsibility to take care of those who truly can't care for themselves. It would also point out that everyone of us, from the poorest to the richest, should pay something towards their healthcare. I have advocated a system that is effectively single-payer similar to the German system. That will never fly in the US. The Democrats idea of single-payer is to have a small percentage of people paying for everybody else. Nothing short of free will satisfy them. The sticking point of the current reconciliation process is premiums and subsidies. Some still think the premiums will be too high for low-income families. We provide the best care in the world. Surely that must have some value and everyone should be willing to pay something for it.
I object to the forced distribution of resources from those who have the most to those who have the least when that group is contributing nothing. When every taxpayer has a 10% payroll tax for health insurance like they do in most countries with socialized medicine I'll quit complaining.
No, not slackers, but they choose to "stay" there.
Before you jump to conclusions, I worked those types of jobs in my past. I read books to increase skills that would allow me to get better paying jobs. Once I made better money, I paid myself through school.
There is nothing wrong with those who do work those jobs, but there is something wrong with those who work them and never make efforts to move out of them if they are concerned about the level of condition their work is.
When it comes down to it, the result is the choice of the individual.
And by the way, your argument is an emotional appeal, not a valid position in the issue.
Someone's hardship does not justify the forcing of others. That is... involuntary servitude.
what about those who do work in good jobs in corporate America, but they don't have healthcare because their small employers don't offer it? or those who are "uninsurable" due to pre-existing conditions? What did they do or not do to deserve that?
I wonder how all the hardworking students would feel if we passed a law forcing them to give up a fraction of their GPA to subsidize the GPA of those who didn't work as hard.
That happens all the time - it's called group projects, and it's very prevalent in K-12 as well as higher ed. Predictably, all the conscientious hard workers hate it, and all the slackers love it.
My response would be that a progressive tax system is fair, that the more capable have a responsibility to help the less capable, and that society has a responsibility to take care of those who truly can't care for themselves. It would also point out that everyone of us, from the poorest to the richest, should pay something towards their healthcare. I have advocated a system that is effectively single-payer similar to the German system. That will never fly in the US. The Democrats idea of single-payer is to have a small percentage of people paying for everybody else. Nothing short of free will satisfy them. The sticking point of the current reconciliation process is premiums and subsidies. Some still think the premiums will be too high for low-income families. We provide the best care in the world. Surely that must have some value and everyone should be willing to pay something for it.
I object to the forced distribution of resources from those who have the most to those who have the least when that group is contributing nothing. When every taxpayer has a 10% payroll tax for health insurance like they do in most countries with socialized medicine I'll quit complaining.
I'll bet that you gladly take your share of forced redistribution every day and never complain about it or object to it. What state do you live in?
That happens all the time - it's called group projects, and it's very prevalent in K-12 as well as higher ed. Predictably, all the conscientious hard workers hate it, and all the slackers love it.
Of course hard-working students hate it. What's your point? What does that have to do with the redistribution of tax revenues??? I don't see any relation whatsoever.
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.
