Last edited by Henrin; 09-14-11 at 09:43 PM.
Dash, you know I love you bro, but I just have to point out something.
You say that you have no responsibility to your fellow citizens, but only to yourself. Well, clearly, you serve in a profession where the citizens of this country are responsible for your well-being (paid through taxes, and, increasingly, through borrowing) and you in turn are responsible for their security. Clearly there is a discrepancy between your stated beliefs and your actions.
Not to mention, yes, it is a bit disingenuous of you to suggest that you can afford health insurance just fine on a salary of 24k when you actually get quite a bit of help from the gov't (TriCare, I assume).
Not trying to bash you here, I'm just sayin' please correct me if I'm wrong.
Last edited by StillBallin75; 09-14-11 at 09:40 PM.
Word on the street is, the Tea Party has selected their unofficial song.
The cheers after the "let him die" was a little inappropriate, but I agree with what Ron Paul said, I think Wolf Blitzer took the statement out of proportion asking that question.
Who said that society should let the guy die?
from what Paul said ( which i don't know his exact stance whether it is or isnt) you can interpret that the guy could just go into debt the rest of his life for the life-saving surgery. That is certainly not letting him die without doing anything. Isn't there a law requiring hospitals to stabilize patients regardless of health insurance?
Being in debt for the rest of your life, in my opinion, is better then dieing at least.
I think this miracle funding stuff should be done by charities, not government.
The freedom to possibly screw over yourself for a mild benefit is anyone's to take advantage of if they want too.
This libertarian utopia that guys like Ron Paul promote is not practiced anywhere.
"You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)
Economists understand the damage that all of those programs do to the economy. Unemployment for example they all agree kills interest to get in the market. If they support them is largely depend on the damage it has caused and the need for those programs to continue because of it.Broadly, what the majority of people believe, and what the majority of economists believe, is that a successful market economic system requires some safety nets provided by the public sector. Programs like unemployment insurance, health coverage for the poor, some form of a disability program, and so form of retirement assistance (possibly means tested), and some type of publicly subsidized health coverage for seniors (possibly means tested).
This is largely my point. Tell me, what has happened to the economies of the world? Where is the work ethic today? Where has it gone since all of this started? Down. Add to that, that most of these programs lower the value of money and it just turns to serve itself.These are components of every successful state on the planet. The only modern industrialized society on the planet that leaves this completely to the private sector is Hong Kong, but the catch is that Hong Kong requires residence to purchase disability insurance, health insurance, retirement investments / annuities, and a private sector provided unemployment insurance.
The thing about utopias is they promote a perfect world order. Libertarians do not promote a perfect world order. The term doesn't fly.This libertarian utopia that guys like Ron Paul promote is not practiced anywhere.
Last edited by Henrin; 09-14-11 at 10:07 PM.