Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2
Well, from my perspective, the values you are espousing just aren't the values of a good person.
Why?
I am more concerned with the nation as a whole instead of an individual who is supposed to take care of their self.
Secondly, I find that while you profess good intent, the end results are not good for the whole, but evil.
And a person of the type we are speaking, wants it for their own good and is therefore selfish and greedy and without a care of who has to pay for it. They fit your stated "They are the values of a selfish, greedy, evil person.".
They are the values of a selfish, greedy, evil person. Somebody who only can understand why he should help somebody else in terms of how it helps him.
Wait a minute now. I never said I wouldn't help others. That is what you are overlooking in your rush to judge another.
But being forced to do so is wrong. No matter how you look at it, forcing it is wrong.
So, just off the top, we have a fundamental disagreement that I don't think debate can really rectify that.
Of course. Which is why I am speaking my opinion to that which you espouse.
Because what you espouse is harmful to the nation.
But, even within your ultra limited moral system where you only care about yourself, you are still wrong. Investing in poverty amelioration is one of the highest return investments there is. We are radically underinvesting in it at huge cost to our society.
Beside you being wrong about only caring for myself...
:naughty
If they can't provide for their own, or survive off the kindness of others, they are a burden and the nation does not need them.
Eliminating the teat suckers before they are a burden would be a higher return and far more beneficial to the nation
Countries that invest more of their GDP in poverty amelioration (which is almost the entire rest of the first world) see huge returns. Poverty has practically been eliminated in most of the first world for decades. The problems we're still struggling with in regards to poverty- the economic drain, the crime, all that- are radically more manageable in the rest of the first world. We're making a huge mistake just letting a problem that is relatively easy to solve fester. We treat the symptoms with a huge prison system and whatnot when it is way, way, cheaper, and in fact much more economically advantageous, to just solve the problem itself.
Ah yes. The everybody should suffer equally, bs.
And that is what it is.
The expenditures are coming back to haunt those nations. It is not sustainable with anything near the quality of care that is received in our current system.
But as I see you would rather burden our future generations. Not only with a piss poor health care system that will cost far to much for what is provided, but one that allows the unproductive and to survive and reproduce.
Yep. That is a real winner there.