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.
Looking after the well being of yourself, or others, is a choice. There is no implicit obligation. We are not born in bondage to each other. There is choice and cooperation. Freedom and reason.
There is no southern or northern way to apply reason. It's universal. So let's not bring race into this, as we seem to bring it into every damned thing nowadays.
Wrong on so many accounts.
You can't properly discuss the ideological and economic history of the United States sans race and class because both played outsized roles in how the US developed (i.e. Manifest Destiny).
The arrival of English colonists, religious pluralism in the colonies, their interaction with Native tribes, the importation of African slaves, the importation of Irish indentured servants, treatment of Irish and Chinese immigrants. There was always an "other" that the elite classes used to divide the various segments of the working class. This division has prevented the idea of mutual obligation from taking root, and has also fostered the idea of rugged individualism. It has lead to us calling people who fall on hard circumstances "lazy" and led to legislation that seeks to fracture and dismantle social safety nets.
Sure, we've gradually progressed and learned from our errors, but you cannot expect race to be dropped from the equation just because you -- personally -- don't want to hear about it.
You're a real estate agent. I'm a Social Science professor. This is my specialty. When I want to know how to get commission on the sale of property, I'll let you dictate your knowledge
If there is a universal law of reason, how one infers and deducts from basic premises, man has yet to find it. It is in many ways the essence of philosophical and political debate since man first stood upright. And how language affects thought and thereby reason, is also a matter of debate.
Imperialism is the process of territorial acquisition through the use of force. We haven’t done that in eons, and don’t do that now. The conduct of our military on foreign lands is often by invitation or agreement or in support of treaty obligations. Where there is overreach, we should pull back. I prefer semi-isolationism with a huge military budge supporting technical superiority over all other nations. Lots of nukes, biological, chemical capability, and lately, computer and space weaponry.
As far as health care and housing inequity, those are correct. Health care is not a right, it’s a service. Same with housing. There is no right to housing, nor should there be. Housing is a product. You buy it. You trade for it. You don’t take it from someone. We eliminated slavery centuries ago. You don’t get to enslave others to provide you with needed goods and services such as housing and health care.
There should be no guaranteed paid sick leave. You have no right to steal pay from someone for staying home with an illness. Personal savings and disability insurance should cover that. Everyone should have 1-2 years of pay stashed away in the bank. Personal savings is a direct personal responsibility. If you make $50,000 per year, you need to have about $75,000-$100,000 in the bank or in liquid securities. You should also be without major debt. Again, personal responsibility. And focusing on the right objectives. All of that is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A RATIONAL ANIMAL. Your needs do not create claims and rights to be paid for by others. Slavery is abolished.
There should be no guaranteed paid parental leave. Your decision to have children is yours and yours alone. All costs and obligations created by that decision should be borne by you, at your sole expense. How in hell do you think that your decision to have kids should be paid for by others? Your employer is trading money for your time and talent. If you have kids and need time off, you are not holding up your end of the deal. You are not providing time or talent. THEREFORE YOU ARE ENTITLED TO ZERO DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS. Do you want some children? Excellent! Congratulations! Save money first. They are expensive. And they are YOUR EXPENSE. NO ONE ELSE’S.
The should be no guarantee of being able to afford basic health care. All health care should be paid for using personal assets and health insurance that you pay for. Again, slavery was abolished. You don’t get to enslave others by making their services your right. You have no such right. Health insurance should be paid for right after food, before housing, and long before your smartphone or other personal luxuries.
Empathy is lovely. Have it yourself. With your money. You don’t get to call something a “safety net” and demand that others pay for it.
Compassion ends at the point of a gun. And your “compassionate” safety net system requires you to put a gun to the heads of your fellow citizens and DEMAND that they pay for what you need and want. That’s evil. Your proposed system of enslavement, aka socialism, has been tried and tried again. It fails. And it will always fail. Why? It is based on victimizing one person for the unearned and undeserved benefit of others. That will not fly. It will only crash and burn.
You have a double standard. On the one hand, you regard government compulsion to pay taxes to support others to be "theft" and "slavery", but on the other hand, you seem to think nothing of the freeriders, those who benefit from the institutions of society without paying taxes for them. To be consistent, you should adopt the system where not only will the fire department not come to your house if you didn't pay your taxes, but the police will not come if you get mugged, because you refused to pay taxes to live in a civilized society. If you want police protection but refuse to pay for social goods that reduce and address crime, then you are advocating (to use your own terms) "theft" and "slavery" of your own type - the "theft" of police protection and the "enslavement" of those paying taxes to support them. Because the police and the anti-poverty programs protected your life and property and you didn't pay for them.
If you shoplift metal bars for your windows to protect you from a thief, or if you shoplift a better lock for your home to protect it from a thief, you are a thief. You are arguing that you should be able to "steal" civilization in order to protect you from "theft". The entire thing is absurd in the highest imaginable degree.
Now you may try to come back with the argument that police protection should exist and be funded in a manner totally detached from anti-poverty programs. The problem with that is that it doesn't work. It costs a lot more money to incarcerate everyone than to give support with food and shelter. So what now? Are you not going to incarcerate the thieves?
Unfortunately as many learned in the 19th century, fire doesn't stop at the building where it started, it engulfs entire communities. The Great Seattle Fire (1889), the Great Spokane Fire (1889), the Paris Texas fire of 1896. The list in the USA is long - part of the reason we have building codes. In Denver, at one time there was no Code regarding sewage. Imagine having your well next to your neighbor's outhouse. In the end, its a balancing act. Does a dry cleaner have the right to dump dry cleaning fluid on his / her property where it will leech into the soil and pollute the Chesapeake Bay?
No. The state has no say in who has or does not have insurance. That is a private matter. The insurance companies will price their product according to the risks. And even a poor person earns money over his lifetime. A lot of it. And it will be garnished. Along with any other wealth such as inheritance, etc. If you don't buy insurance, you will suffer. That suffering will lead others to make better decisions. Just like it has with Covid. Death leads to changes in behavior and what is socially acceptable.
Have some faith in people. They're not as stupid as leftists think they are and presume to address through tyranny and interference.
So, if at first 10% decline insurance, then 20%, 30% etc. but the rate of injury remains static, the cost of insurance keeps rising for those who do pay, at what point does it become too much of a burden to be carrying the can for others?
So, if at first 10% decline insurance, then 20%, 30% etc. but the rate of injury remains static, the cost of insurance keeps rising for those who do pay, at what point does it become too much of a burden to be carrying the can for others?
Again this assumes a level of irrationality that is not supported by the evidence. People buy health insurance, people buy car insurance, people buy life insurance, people choose employment based on the offer of health insurance. All without compulsion. It is basic survival behavior and we can count on it.
So almost no one will decline insurance that is vital to a smooth and happy life.
Unfortunately as many learned in the 19th century, fire doesn't stop at the building where it started, it engulfs entire communities. The Great Seattle Fire (1889), the Great Spokane Fire (1889), the Paris Texas fire of 1896. The list in the USA is long - part of the reason we have building codes. In Denver, at one time there was no Code regarding sewage. Imagine having your well next to your neighbor's outhouse. In the end, its a balancing act. Does a dry cleaner have the right to dump dry cleaning fluid on his / her property where it will leech into the soil and pollute the Chesapeake Bay?
A dry cleaner that dumps fluid that adversely affects people on adjoining properties has violated the rights of those people. We have legal and financial remedies to handle that. It’s not a problem really.
Again this assumes a level of irrationality that is not supported by the evidence. People buy health insurance, people buy car insurance, people buy life insurance, people choose employment based on the offer of health insurance. All without compulsion. It is basic survival behavior and we can count on it.
So almost no one will decline insurance that is vital to a smooth and happy life.
No one who uses roads funded by the public has any business driving without car insurance. Don't want car insurance? Don't drive a motor vehicle on public roads. That's why we have financial responsibility laws that mandate the purchase of car insurance and penalties for those who violate them.
Life insurance is an option and I can see older people or people without financial dependents who choose not to purchase it.
Health insurance? There are some complicated reasons for mandating it. We made a decision years ago as a country through a law called EMTALA to require hospitals to provide emergency services to all. We do this not just because everyone can require those services, but because it is a danger to everyone if hospitals can refuse those services to anyone. For example, if one day I am involved in a car accident and injured and forget to include health insurance information in my pocket I could be refused medical care in a system without the equivalent of EMTALA. This could happen to anyone. We do not wish to put sick and critically injured people in the position of having to prove they are insured before they can get treatment, so we simply mandate these people be treated. Once, we do this though there are payment and reimbursement issues for hospitals. It becomes necessary to provide insurance for the poor and elderly simply to keep hospitals from going out of business.
I just love the way libertarians think everything can be done without compulsion. It tells me they don't understand much about people.
Sure, we've gradually progressed and learned from our errors, but you cannot expect race to be dropped from the equation just because you -- personally -- don't want to hear about it.
You're a real estate agent. I'm a Social Science professor. This is my specialty. When I want to know how to get commission on the sale of property, I'll let you dictate your knowledge
Wow, great post. Repped!
You sound like you have, dare I say it, conservative views, or at least libertarian. That is, acknowledging and learning from history, as well accepting its dark elements, but not trying to "cancel" it, like by toppling statues or burning books. I wish more professors were like you. Many of mine were far-left. Which was fine when I was a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed college student. But today, I'd probably get expelled from that college for my political views.
Many great comments on here guys and nice thread. I think we will soon reach a point where rugged individualism will become economically unfeasible (and this is coming from an old conservative guy). Just look at the price of housing these days. I feel bad for the younger generation, I really do! It's hard enough to scrape together money for a small apartment in the big cities let alone a house.
We'll soon see changes in how people live. Wouldn't be surprised a bit in the next 10 years for mortgage lenders to start offering loans on co-op housing where two families group together to purchase that 2000 square foot home in the burbs and jointly live together.
We'll also start seeing an uptick in multi generation living soon. Heck the Asian counties have been doing this for years and the only reason the westerners don't do it is rugged individualism.
There are a couple of examples why rugged individualism will be shown the door.
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.
