Some congressman just read a letter from a constituent who said that they were "embarrassed to tell people that they didn't have health care." They ended the letter by asking for those same people to pay for their health care.
When did it not become embarrassing to take something from others that you did not earn? A burglar at least has the decency to break into your house himself. Liberals want to take your money through the power of government.
12 comments:
Just curious: how much do you think an American citizen should pay in order to "earn" the police cruiser that comes when that burglar breaks into his house? Or the fire truck that comes to stop it from burning down? Or the military satellites that protect it from a Russian or a North Korean ICBM? Or the helicopters that evacuate him when it's flooded by a hurricane?
Or do you think these, too, should be available only to those who are able to pay the market-determined price? Can't have any of that damned socialism, after all. So let's send you a bill every month - your full, equal share of the government services you not only have, but take for granted. If you don't pay, we won't take care of your children when they're sick. We won't help you when you're robbed, we won't save you from a fire, and when Oregon's invaded by Canada, we'll leave you behind.
Kaelri, good question, even if it is a rather obvious one. But Daniel is not here for discussion, he's here to have his ego fed. You've done your duty, but don't expect an answer, although I can answer on his behalf: Daniel's wet dream of a perfect society is a no-holds-barred, regulation-free all-caucasian capitalist clusterfuck that would give Ayn Rand an orgasm -- even though she's dead.
Kaelri, the satellites are not for protecting us. The satellites are for letting us know when the missiles are launched. Obama wants to get rid of our missile defense system.
Now to the health care problem. Am I supposed to pay for people to sit at home smoking cigarettes, drinking booze and eating Big Macs? In other words, you want me to pay for people's unhealthy lifestyle and laziness and I don't get a say in it, I just have to pay. Where in the US constitution does it say productive people have to pay for lazy people. Can you show me where socialism or communism has done so much more for its people. Capitalism has created the largest amount of wealth ever. Socialism and communism destroys innovation.
Most of the creature comforts you are using daily are a result of capitalism. The computer you are using is a result of capitalism. Most of the health devices that saves lives every single minute in this country are the result of capitalism. You probably are eating because somebody needed you to a job as a result of capitalism unless you are a government employee. Is that not hilarious, capitalism has probably helped to feed, clothe and help your health concerns for your whole life and you are now trying to destroy it. You need to pay attention to the socialist health systems of the UK and Canada. They are starting to crash. Insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting different results. I would also call that liberalism. Liberalism=insanity.
You state: "So let's send you a bill every month - your full, equal share of the government services you not only have, but take for granted. If you don't pay, we won't take care of your children when they're sick. We won't help you when you're robbed, we won't save you from a fire, and when Oregon's invaded by Canada, we'll leave you behind."
We get a bill every month, often more than once a month, it depends of you get a paycheck bimonthly or monthly. The taxes are deducted from your paycheck. Maybe you have never worked, but the government through your employer takes taxes out. Communists don't understand because they work and exist at the pleasure of the government.
You really need to open your eyes. Our founding fathers over two hundred years ago could figure out that large governments were evil, why can't you do it now? I'm sure you and I had a comparable public school education. I graduated high school in the eighties, maybe you are a product of a more current public education where they teach communism is good. I think seventy million Chinese would dispute that claim. That many were murdered by Mao Tse Tung. I think the Soviets murdered twenty million or so. I could be wrong on this number. So, communism murdered maybe a hundred million people last century, put billions of people in miserable existences for life and you want us to emulate that system?
They say there is large waste in medicare and medicaid, why are we not talking about stopping the waste first. In our current health care debates we are not talking about tort reform and allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines? There are probably several other ideas that would help but the democrats are not allowing these ideas to be even talked about. Why is that? Maybe it's not about health care, maybe it's about control. With health care and cap and trade and all the bailouts, the government will control about half of the economy. That is halfway to communism. Do you trust the government to make economic, health and education decisions for you?
No thanks!
kaelir, I bet you can't wait for Senate Bill 2433 to pass. We will be providing welfare for the rest of the planet. I bet that gets a tingle up your leg. If this passes, we will be the ones needing welfare in a few years. I think we already have over a nundred TRILLION dollars of unfunded mandates. Social security, medicare, medicaid and other stuff. We are broke, our children are broke and our grand children are broke. You will guarantee that we will be bankrupt. Thanks a lot. I hope if you have children, they don't mind living enslaved to pay off the debt for the rest of their lives You might want to check into German history prior to WWII. That is where we are headed.
Good lord. Where do I begin?
First of all, you are clearly a man who has never heard the story of Joe Republican. You, sir, are a lifelong beneficiary of a whole host of collectivist liberal policies and institutions. Things that literally comprise our concept of civilization. We are both socialists. The only difference is that I'm not ashamed of it.
Second, I find it highly illuminating that throughout your diatribe, the words "socialism," "communism," "liberalism" and "big government" are completely interchangeable. I wouldn't have been too surprised to see a "fascism" or a "Nazism" in there. This tells me that you truly have no idea what it is that you oppose about this reform.
You seem to think it's about destroying the capitalist system and personal property rights. If that were true, I would find the idea of the public option truly horrifying. A policy that lets a government-funded insurance company compete with private insurers in a free market? To spur innovation, destroy oligopolist practices and drive down costs, all while giving individual Americans the right to choose whatever insurance option they want? If any? A true communist would be apoplectic. Giving citizens more control over their lives - it's madness!
I don't believe the government should tell people what doctors they're allowed to see or what treatments they're allowed to get. We shouldn't be told when to live and when to die. I don't believe bureaucrats should have the power to drop my coverage through legal loopholes or restrict my access to alternative options. The reason I support this reform is that it doesn't do any of those things, but private insurers do all of them. The hypocrisy in blasting the government for interfering with people's lives but cherishing private industry's right to do exactly the same thing is beyond my power to cure. Government is why you and your children don't work 80-hour weeks in a sweatshop. You should show some gratitude.
Third, you most certainly do "get a say in it." This is not taxation without representation. We elected President Obama, and we elected the 220 federal representatives who voted for the bill last night. Every single poll tells the same story: We The People want this to be law. Welcome to the republic, Dave.
Oh, I almost forgot to answer your other question:
"Where in the US constitution does it say productive people have to pay for lazy people."
The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.
"The general welfare," especially, is a phrase uniquely identified with both collectivist political philosophy and the founding fathers of the United States. If you think George Washington would have put up with this preexisting condition shit, you're out of your mind.
It's a lost cause, Kaelri. You're arguing with people who think "Red Dawn" was a documentary.
Yeah, I know. It's just funny.
Kaelri, you have come up with a few other problems with the current health care. Why cannot we simply solve those few problems instead of taking over the health care system? Do you honestly think if the government offers a PUBLIC PLAN, that it is just to compete with private companies.
The government has basically unlimited resources compared to a private company. The government can mandate all sorts of things that the private company will have to pay for. It will be driven out of business. Check out the closed Chrysler dealers for an example of the power of the federal government. They will shut down private insurance and then the federal government will be the only game in town. The politicians will be running our health care. That will work out really well.
Like I said, it's not about fixing the health care system, that could be done with a few changes, it's about control. Socialism is halfway to communism, you might as well be honest and call it what it is. Communism killed at least one hundred million people last century, it is evil.
You state: "Every single poll tells the same story: We The People want this to be law. Welcome to the republic, Dave."
Every single poll I've seen says We the People want the government to work on jobs and the economy, not health care or cap and trade. So why is that not happening according to your reasoning?
The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.
With the above statement, the government should provide everyone with the safest car on the planet, everyone should have an armory in their homes. After all, it's for the general welfare of the US. Hell, why not invade mexico and take their oil and gas fields, it's for the general welfare of the US. That's a bullshit argument. I can come up with probably a million ways to improve things in the US for the general welfare that should be paid by for the taxes of everyone. Our founding fathers believed in limited government, the Constitution applies to the federal government. Its sole purpose was to spell out what the government can do, nothing more, nothing less.
No Anon 5:16 PM, I'm trying to educate people who think Mao Tse Tung was a wonderful human being, like you two and Anita Dunn, the White House communications director.
Hm, hm. So let me follow your logic here. A government-subsidized public option leads to mandates on private insurers, leads to a single-payer monopoly, leads to a government takeover of the system, leads to the creation of a political bureaucracy, leads to a communist revolution, leads to millions of people dying.
From a health care bill.
You know when we were hearing that before? In the 60s, when Medicare was getting started. Here's what a certain Californian politician had to say about "socialized medicine":
"This program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow, and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country until one day, as Normal Thomas said, we will wake to find that we have socialism, and if you don’t do this and I don’t do this, one of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free."
Ahem. Forty years on, Medicare is one of the most popular and successful government-run programs of all time, and the senior population would pretty much lynch anyone who tried to take it away. Notice that Medicare survived that same speaker's eight-year term as President without any more than idle threats of budget cuts. It works, and people like it. As it turns out, not everything the big bad government touches turns to coal.
On polling:
- "Every single poll I've seen says We the People want the government to work on jobs and the economy, not health care or cap and trade..."
Is that so?
- "...So why is that not happening according to your reasoning?"
Well, I seem to recall a rather impressive pair of stimulus packages being passed earlier this year, which may have saved 650,000 jobs and brought an actual increase in GDP. So I daresay it is happening.
- "With the above statement, the government should provide everyone with the safest car on the planet, everyone should have an armory in their homes. After all, it's for the general welfare of the US. Hell, why not invade mexico and take their oil and gas fields, it's for the general welfare of the US. That's a bullshit argument."
...it's not an "argument," Dave. It's Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America. Not even an amendment - it was written by the very same Founding Fathers you so gushingly praise, was ratified in 1789, and has served as the basis of practical power for an institution that exists to protect your rights. All taxation is socialist, and without it, you and I wouldn't even have this opportunity to talk about it.
The United States Congress is charged with regulating commerce. It's not just a power; it's a duty. If government didn't regulate the banks, last year's recession would have undeniably been another Great Depression. If government didn't pass labor laws, my eight-year-old cousin wouldn't be going to school, she'd be losing her fingers on an assembly line. If government didn't regulate the health care industry, greedy profiteering bureaucrats would be allowed to deny you a life-saving surgery, even if you'd earned every cent to pay for it, because you had acne as a teenager.
So can we dispense with the alarmist Red Scare bullshit and get together on making that last case a hypothetical?
Dave, once again, you equate Stalinism with socialism, which is possibly the biggest lie of the last century, but I'm not going to argue the point with you because I've discussed this with you before, and you are determined to remain ignorant, and to repeat lies -- which, I realize, you don't yourself believe are lies, but which are nevertheless false. To borrow a little Second Amendment rhetoric, ideologies don't kill people; people with ideologies kill people ... and whatever Stalin's ideology was, it sure as hell wasn't socialism (or at least, nothing that Marx would have recognized as such) even though he believed himself to be the authentic representation of the socialist ideology every bit as much as you do.
But I've got to ask you: You seem genuinely fearful and angry about this healthcare situation, seeing it and other government programs as creeping "socialism." My question to you is this: Do you actually believe that President Barack Obama intends (or, at the very least, desires) to implement a system of government in which his administration and the government can wrongly imprison and systematically murder millions of human beings?
Please respond, I'm genuinely curious to know what you think about this.
Love how y'all had a hootenany at the expense of the blog owner's politics.
Anyone who says liberals are just out to confiscate the little guy's hardearned is clueless enough to rate getting fscked in the ear in just the way you did. Hahahaha.
Post a Comment