- Joined
- Sep 29, 2007
- Messages
- 29,262
- Reaction score
- 10,126
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Then finance it, or learn to accept fate.
You can kiss my ass. I have insurance a form of financing
Last edited:
Then finance it, or learn to accept fate.
You can kiss my ass. I have insurance.
Hey, I have a great idea! Lets go murder some random people and take their hearts out and use them for transplants! With more hearts available, the cost of a new heart is bound to go down.Then finance it, or learn to accept fate.
Any insurance is going to do that, private, or subsidized. I didn't answer it, because you aren't going to like my answer.
Hey, I have a great idea! Lets go murder some random people and take their hearts out and use them for transplants! With more hearts available, the cost of a new heart is bound to go down.
What? it's either that or stem cells, and we all know that the use of stem cells is evil and uncouth!
Sorry your appeal to emotion didn't work on me. With over seven billion people on this planet who are causing more harm than good, we can afford to let quite a few go.
I'm guessing if you are hesitant to discuss it on a public forum, it would have little to any chance of being acceptable to the majority of voters.
Then finance it, or learn to accept fate.
Every dollar you have the federal government has a fiduciary responsibility for is what I mean.
Your answer is that only the super wealthy get medical treatment? I wonder why no politician has ever ran on that platform and won?
I'm not worried about voters liking it or not. I'm a very unlikeable person with very unlikeable ideas.
So you don't seriously think this plan could ever get passed. We are in agreement there.
What appeal to emotion?
BTW there ain't 7 billion people in the world:
World Development Indicators and Global Development Finance - Google Public Data Explorer
And and not all 6.8+ billion people are causing harm.
6.9 as of 2010. Here's something more up to date:
US Census Bureau
The amount of people is causing major problems. More people means more energy needed, more production, more industrialization, more cars on the road, more food consumed, more land taken, etc etc etc.
So you don't seriously think this plan could ever get passed. We are in agreement there.
That's why we need government. To craft policies that give the appearance of abundance despite booming population and dwindling resources.
What are yaull talking about lol!!!
6.9 as of 2010. Here's something more up to date:
US Census Bureau
The amount of people is causing major problems. More people means more energy needed, more production, more industrialization, more cars on the road, more food consumed, more land taken, etc etc etc.
Nobody in their right mind would approve of such a thing. even I wouldn't vote for it, but mass reduction of population will at some point become entirely necessary, and part of that is to allow the surplus population to die off.
Your answer is that only the super wealthy get medical treatment? I wonder why no politician has ever ran on that platform and won?
I'm talking about allowing the weak to die, and he is correctly telling me that such a thing is appalling.
Nobody in their right mind would approve of such a thing. even I wouldn't vote for it, but mass reduction of population will at some point become entirely necessary, and part of that is to allow the surplus population to die off.
Now you have me really confused. You oppose killing people in wars for resources, but you approve of eliminating "surplus population" through denial of health care?
I'm arguing on the basis of necessity, not morality.
How have been able to uniquely separate the two?