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.
Politics of and with both the candidate and listener. They will both find those that appeal to theirs.
And in the case of the Pandemic as viewed by the libertarian and the right, that has persistently gone against the medical facts, opinions and recommendations.
Just 2 weeks to flatten the curve. Does anyone here actually think a full lockdown of the US back last spring would have done anything at all? The answer is no. There's no way to stop the spread of this virus with a global economy where even if we did lock down, a bunch of braindead politicians are allowing covid positive people in from mexico and not mandating they get vaccinated or checked because they want those democrat votes at election time.... where we have a supply chain that demands goods ship globally because companies rely on suppliers from all over the place. We'd have to lock down the entire planet. It wouldn't even be possible. The cure would be worse than the virus in the end. It's time to accept covid as part of our reality and manage as best we can.
When I showed you how the u.s. measures up to other nations in heath care, you automatically go into the 'can't compare our lifestyle to other countries'. However, when you look at our poor, you compare it to other nations. Would it surprise you to find undeveloped countries happy in their life? Western materialistic values --- ? You an I differ in our raising --- does not make one better than the other, just different.
When the government does not offer you a "choice" you have neither freedom or liberty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
Exactly what choice would you want the government to give you? How would that change the way you live? What choice do undeveloped countries give their citizens that the US doesn't give us? You have described what you are against, but what are you for in tangible terms, not just slogans?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
Exactly what choice would you want the government to give you?
Undo the 1913 income tax; if it must stay keep it at 1% as promised.
Make SS a choice. 401k is a choice, why not government insurance? (the government needs all its citizens to have that 9 digit number)
Stop with the regulations on business production.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
How would that change the way you live?
Without the income tax, I'd have all the wages I earned and I wouldn't be a slave to the State.
Again with SS --- I wouldn't have to qualify for my earnings and I could retire on my own terms.
With business increased production on a free market, that would reduce the size of government employees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
What choice do undeveloped countries give their citizens that the US doesn't give us?
My biggest indicator for the undeveloped is that they are still having larger families than the u.s. Here is a list of Countries and Territories click on anyone of them and see how they compare. One reason families matter, is because it is a choice, that for the u.s. economically, the people can not afford to have the children. If a person is still gong to try, they will most likely end up on the government's dime, doing it. And they will be black balled by society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
You have described what you are against, but what are you for in tangible terms, not just slogans?
I've already told you and I can't make it any simpler than this, when the government takes your choice away, you have neither freedom or liberty. That is not a slogan and I can not put it anymore tangible than that.
I'll give an example --- Obamacare and it was ruled that the government can make you buy health insurance (of course they can; we are already in the retirement scheme) People compared that to auto insurance. I can sell my car and not have to pay (corporate) auto insurance, but I can't sell my body, to get out of buying health insurance. The government rendered to me, no choice. However, there is one way --- sell everything and be homeless. That was the choice Bob and still is for many people.
Now for the subject of the thread --- the government made people go home and they couldn't work and it amazes me people see nothing wrong with that. This situation keeps getting better and better:
This is NOT what happens 100% of the way, 100% of the time. Note that after all I did take the vaccine, and am grateful for its availability, and for the taxpayer dollars that went into the research that made the vaccines possible. But what happens more often than not, is the organs of power institute preventative measures, at a cost-benefit ratio that, to put it mildly, is unwarranted. And because government alone wields ultimate sovereignty, we peons have no choice, but to comply.
In the case of the Pandemic, the medical establishments are forming their opinions and recommendations based on most recent and best data, and gov't is tending to follow those.
There are general opinions and recommendations, and then there are more local. And then how they apply to the individual. All the more complicated as the virus itself and Pandemic evolve over time. It is inherently more difficult and less accurate with the broader scope.
Well I won't debate your preferences. You are entitled to want what you want. But you can't have it in any first world country. You can have it in many third world countries. Why are you still here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
Undo the 1913 income tax; if it must stay keep it at 1% as promised.
Make SS a choice. 401k is a choice, why not government insurance? (the government needs all its citizens to have that 9 digit number)
Stop with the regulations on business production.
Without the income tax, I'd have all the wages I earned and I wouldn't be a slave to the State.
Again with SS --- I wouldn't have to qualify for my earnings and I could retire on my own terms.
With business increased production on a free market, that would reduce the size of government employees.
My biggest indicator for the undeveloped is that they are still having larger families than the u.s. Here is a list of Countries and Territories click on anyone of them and see how they compare. One reason families matter, is because it is a choice, that for the u.s. economically, the people can not afford to have the children. If a person is still gong to try, they will most likely end up on the government's dime, doing it. And they will be black balled by society.
I've already told you and I can't make it any simpler than this, when the government takes your choice away, you have neither freedom or liberty. That is not a slogan and I can not put it anymore tangible than that.
I'll give an example --- Obamacare and it was ruled that the government can make you buy health insurance (of course they can; we are already in the retirement scheme) People compared that to auto insurance. I can sell my car and not have to pay (corporate) auto insurance, but I can't sell my body, to get out of buying health insurance. The government rendered to me, no choice. However, there is one way --- sell everything and be homeless. That was the choice Bob and still is for many people.
Now for the subject of the thread --- the government made people go home and they couldn't work and it amazes me people see nothing wrong with that. This situation keeps getting better and better:
In the case of the Pandemic, the medical establishments are forming their opinions and recommendations based on most recent and best data, and gov't is tending to follow those.
To be sure, I am not accusing medical doctors or epidemiologists of cooking the data, of duplicity or other nefarious behavior. Yes, occasionally this does happen, but rarely. I don't mistrust their recommendations in the sense of their medical accuracy. What irritates me is how these recommendations get implemented.
By way of example, if my medical doctor alerts me that I'm overweight, and consequently my odds of disease or premature death are increased, I don't view his diagnosis with suspicion or contempt. The gentleman is well-educated and sincere. I respect his opinions. But what if I like food, I like the husky and corpulent appearance that being overweight entails, and I don't particularly care to live a long life? In other words, what if I view the detriments of being overweight not as a "bug", but as a "feature"? Then I'll continue eating a pound of bacon for breakfast every day.
But what if instead I am forced by executive-order to cease eating bacon? Because after all, by abstaining from bacon, or at least moderating my consumption, my health is advanced. Well, yeah, most assuredly it IS advanced! That's not in dispute. What's in dispute is the cost-benefit calculation, and in particular, that I am forced to behave in the manner than advances health, rather than, the manner that I happen to like.
In sum, I am not blaming Dr. Fauci or Dr. Birx or any of those folks. Actually, I have considerable respect for them, as medical professionals. Where I bristle is in the mandatory following of said professionals' advice. The fault is with the people who wield the power, and not the people who do research or report said research's results.
To be sure, I am not accusing medical doctors or epidemiologists of cooking the data, of duplicity or other nefarious behavior. Yes, occasionally this does happen, but rarely. I don't mistrust their recommendations in the sense of their medical accuracy. What irritates me is how these recommendations get implemented.
By way of example, if my medical doctor alerts me that I'm overweight, and consequently my odds of disease or premature death are increased, I don't view his diagnosis with suspicion or contempt. The gentleman is well-educated and sincere. I respect his opinions. But what if I like food, I like the husky and corpulent appearance that being overweight entails, and I don't particularly care to live a long life? In other words, what if I view the detriments of being overweight not as a "bug", but as a "feature"? Then I'll continue eating a pound of bacon for breakfast every day.
But what if instead I am forced by executive-order to cease eating bacon? Because after all, by abstaining from bacon, or at least moderating my consumption, my health is advanced. Well, yeah, most assuredly it IS advanced! That's not in dispute. What's in dispute is the cost-benefit calculation, and in particular, that I am forced to behave in the manner than advances health, rather than, the manner that I happen to like.
In sum, I am not blaming Dr. Fauci or Dr. Birx or any of those folks. Actually, I have considerable respect for them, as medical professionals. Where I bristle is in the mandatory following of said professionals' advice. The fault is with the people who wield the power, and not the people who do research or report said research's results.
Prohibition increases crime. They can have my bacon when they pry it from my cold dead hands.
Just 2 weeks to flatten the curve. Does anyone here actually think a full lockdown of the US back last spring would have done anything at all? The answer is no. There's no way to stop the spread of this virus with a global economy where even if we did lock down, a bunch of braindead politicians are allowing covid positive people in from mexico and not mandating they get vaccinated or checked because they want those democrat votes at election time.... where we have a supply chain that demands goods ship globally because companies rely on suppliers from all over the place. We'd have to lock down the entire planet. It wouldn't even be possible. The cure would be worse than the virus in the end. It's time to accept covid as part of our reality and manage as best we can.
If you recall how the disease spread so violently and easily last spring there was no way businesses could function. Lockdown is a broad term, there are practical steps to be taken as the disease rises and falls. Just claiming we need more freedom is not some sort of rational health policy.
If you recall how the disease spread so violently and easily last spring there was no way businesses could function. Lockdown is a broad term, there are practical steps to be taken as the disease rises and falls. Just claiming we need more freedom is not some sort of rational health policy.
Spoken like a true disciple of King George
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.
