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.
It's like anytime you bring up universal healthcare or basic income they come out the woodworks screaming evil socialists!!! I'm just confused what is so evil about wanting to help society? We already are socialist on our police, fire depts, schools (except college), roads, etc but not certain others.
It's like anytime you bring up universal healthcare or basic income they come out the woodworks screaming evil socialists!!! I'm just confused what is so evil about wanting to help society? We already are socialist on our police, fire depts, schools (except college), roads, etc but not certain others.
Socialism (definition)
1) any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
2) a system of society or group living in which there is no private property.
A socialist healthcare system would be one where the citizens or state owned the insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and hospitals. And democrats have never proposed any socialist program in our government. Democrats simply desire certain regulations (and those regulations often limit the profits of the large corporations that finance the republican party.)
Republican corporate groups have used propaganda techniques to confuse and vilify democrat regulations on large corporations. And this propaganda machine causes republicans to say democrats are socialists (when in fact democrats have never proposed any socialist law.)
Why is it evil to tax the rich and give the money to the poor?
And why is it good to tax the poor and give the money to the rich?
And Trumps infrastructure plan gives the wealthy ownership of our public land, roads, parking meters, and bridges. And then the wealthy will charge regular Americans fees to use things like roads and bridges. Robert Reich (TRUMP
Why is giving all Americans equal ownership of America's resources evil?
And why is giving the wealthy ownership of America's resources good?
...if you make everything equal, the people are all just equally suppressed.
Equality of mediocrity...
More quotes from my own post history, because I've said it all better before and I'm lazy today:
Quote:
I'm for limited government, limited meddling by government in the affairs of humans, an open marketplace of ideas, powerful individuals, free minds, and free markets.
Quote:
What do you mean by liberalism?
Do you mean more and more power given over to government? Strong government, weak individuals? Collectivism over individualism? Punishing success and rewarding indolence? The primacy of more and more globalized rule? Authoritarian surveillance and control of things like the market and free exchange between people, what people do or put into their bodies, and social engineering of as many aspects of life as possible?
Do you mean the regressive left narratives whereby we assert that all white people are racist / all men are mysoginistic / all cis people are transphobic, where the identity groups you belong to determine the "justice" that's applied to you, where certain facts may exist but pointing them out makes you a bigot?
I mean, I call myself a classical liberal, and I am a lifelong atheist, a devout believer in free expression, a strong supporter of abortion rights, strongly in favor of legalization of drugs and ending of the Drug War, and generally against US military intervention in the rest of the world. But I want none of the above.
Quote:
Post-modernism is an assault on classical liberalism, on everything we’ve learned since the Enlightenment – rationality, empiricism, science, clarity of mind, dialogue, individualism, and the marketplace of ideas.
Quote:
You mention individual freedom. Do you believe in free minds and free markets? Do you wish to protect my economic freedom? Are you really a strong believer in individualism over collectivism? Could you give some examples of opinions you hold that support individual rights over collective power, individual responsibility over equality of outcome, and economic freedom over top-down planning and redistribution?
Trumps tax cuts raise workers income by 0.8% and raise the richest 0.1% of Americans income by 14.2%.
Why is it evil to tax the rich and give the money to the poor?
And why is it good to tax the poor and give the money to the rich?
And within most of that 0.1 per cent (one person in 1000) most of the wealth is represented either by corporate securities or, in the case of the 0.01 per cent one person in 10,000), by the equity of a closely-held enterprise (I. E: a self-made multi-generational family); as each generation passes from the scene, more and more of that wealth comes under the control of philanthropies and institutions -- a from of socialism in its own right, but one far more answerable to those in charge, and probably less susceptible to the pursuit of power for power's sake.
It's like anytime you bring up universal healthcare or basic income they come out the woodworks screaming evil socialists!!! I'm just confused what is so evil about wanting to help society? We already are socialist on our police, fire depts, schools (except college), roads, etc but not certain others.
Do you even know what a Neo-Conservative is?
They were formerly called Social Democrats.
The godfather of Neo-Conservatism is a Jew named Irving Kristol. You can read his book, "Two Cheers for Capitalism" to get a better understanding. You can start by asking yourself why only two cheers instead of three cheers. The short answer is that Neo-Conservatives don't particularly like Capitalism.
After that, you can read "The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism" written by Neo-Con economic guru Daniel Bell, who was also a Jew.
Conservatives do not worship or faun over Jews like socialist Max Weber who was one of the founders of the German Democratic Party, but Neo-Conservatives do.
For the record, the term "Neo-Conservative" was coined by a New York Times writer who was interviewing Irving Kristol in 1976. It was a misnomer, since it does not accurately describe Irving Kristol and his ilk.
As far as Universal Basic Income is concerned, to provide every adult (and there are more than 288,000,000 Americans age 18 and over) with a basic income of $1,324/per month -- which is what the average Social Security recipient receives -- you would need to increase the FICA payroll tax to 52% -- 26% each for employer and employee.
The sad thing is that even if you did that, people would still qualify for welfare like HUD Section 8 and Food Stamps, which defeats the whole purpose of Universal Basic Income.
To get everyone off of welfare, which is what UBI proponents claim will happen, you'd need to pay at least $4,400 month, which would require $15,206,400,000,000 or $15.2 TRILLION annually and necessitate a FICA payroll tax of 100% which would only generate $8,741,990,052,448 or $8.7 TRILLION.
That would leave you $7 TRILLION short, so you couldn't even do it.
To give every adult $2,000 per month, then you'd need $6,912,000,000,000 or $6.9 TRILLION.
That would require a FICA payroll tax increase to 80%.
So you can scream Basic Income as loud as you want, but unless and until you can find a way to fund it, it won't happen.
As far as healthcare, it was federal and State governments laws, regulations and policies that created the nightmare you have now, so why should we trust the federal government with universal healthcare?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow
Free market is absolutely the most natural state of affairs. A lefty scared of it doesn't make it unnatural.
Yes, it is.
Interfering in the Free Market only creates misery for people.
It's like anytime you bring up universal healthcare or basic income they come out the woodworks screaming evil socialists!!! I'm just confused what is so evil about wanting to help society? We already are socialist on our police, fire depts, schools (except college), roads, etc but not certain others.
Actually, some of have said that if we want those things, we have to tax like European/Scandinavian countries do to raise enough tax revenue to fund it: Put the middle class in the top income tax rate bracket, and charge everyone a 25% VAT tax on top of that.
Countries like the UK and Canada use some socialism with success. No one is talking a out socialzed everything. Just things that benefit all and are very expensive if one person has to pay for it. Federal roads, national parks, health care. Not as scary as some are making it out to be.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,163 posts, read 13,449,232 times
Reputation: 19459
I do actually draw the line at Mike Pence stating the Charlie Gard Case is down to single payer healthcare in the UK.
Firstly the same law that the childs welfare must come firsr applies to both private and public hospitals in the UK and is enshirined in the Childrens Act 1989, Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Secondly the UK has private childrens hospitals but they don't want Charlie Gard or the publicity and on-going legal case that go with the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telegraph
In the hearing on Monday, the lawyer for Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) said that Charlie’s parents had requested he be moved.
“Charlie’s parents were no longer wanting him to be treated [at GOSH],” said Katie Gollop QC, representing the hospital. She added: “The hospital has tried to do what it can to find a place of treatment acceptable to the parents...“Not surprisingly no other hospital was prepared to take Charlie’s case.”
In the hearing, Mr Gard, 32, attempted to interrupt Ms Gollop, who told the court: “That is Mr Gard asking why then did you refer us to Harley Street?”
It is not clear when attempts were made to transfer Charlie, nor which clinic in Harley Street in central London, he was referring to. The hospital would not discuss the matter further while sources close to the family were unable to explain what was meant.
Relations between the parents and the hospital remain fraught.
The judge in the case has warned he will rule on the evidence rather than be swayed by tweets in what has been seen as a sideswipe at Donald Trump, who intervened in the case in support of the child.
Mike Pence, the US vice president, has also waded into the row, using Charlie’s case to insist a universal healthcare system would not work in the US.
Mr Pence told an American radio programme, hosted by a right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh: “The heartbreaking story of the 11-month-old Charlie Gard in England is a story of single-payer healthcare.
“We hope and pray that little Charlie Gard gets every chance, but the American people oughta reflect on the fact that for all the talk on the left about single-payer, that’s where it takes us”
Charlie suffers from mitochondrial depletion syndrome, which saps the energy from his organs and muscles. Hospitals in the US and in Italy have said they are prepared to treat the child with an experimental nucleoside therapy.
But the hospital and other experts say the treatment will not work on Charlie, who they say is suffering irreversible brain damage.
Last edited by Brave New World; 07-13-2017 at 03:31 AM..
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.
