Why exactly are you unwilling to pay for other people's medical care?

[Arianrhod]

Link?

Your own posts supporting social welfare programs and Obamacare subsidies. Are you claiming you don't support those things?

I support a strong, healthy America. It amazes me how many on the right don't. You don't mind paying the Waltons' taxes for them, though.

We can keep ourselves, and our communities, healthy without abusing the power of government.

Yes, we are.

Sadly, we are abusing government, by using it as a tool for mandating behavior. Authoritarian government isn't sustainable.

This reminds me of those Christians who invented the "War on Christmas" so they could blubber about how oppressed they were. I'd recommend the same cure for you: Take a trip to North Korea. Then tell use about "authoritarian government."

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

 

[dblack]

Your own posts supporting social welfare programs and Obamacare subsidies. Are you claiming you don't support those things?

I support a strong, healthy America. It amazes me how many on the right don't. You don't mind paying the Waltons' taxes for them, though.

We can keep ourselves, and our communities, healthy without abusing the power of government.

Yes, we are.

Sadly, we are abusing government, by using it as a tool for mandating behavior. Authoritarian government isn't sustainable.

Sadly, too many want their behavior mandated at a costs to the rest of us who don't.

Then let's change that. The current approach simply formalizes it.

 

[dblack]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

 

[Pop23]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

Sometimes the club membership is collected at the door, and the members aren't forced to become members at all.

But then again, a country founded on respecting the individual ain't exactly the club you make it to be.

 

[dblack]

The premise of this thread is that anyone who is opposed socializing medical costs via government, is opposed to helping others. But that's not necessarily, or even (I'd argue) usually, the case. Limited government isn't about crushing altruism or community safety nets. It's about recognizing that government is the wrong tool for that job.

 

[dblack]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

Sometimes the club membership is collected at the door, and the members aren't forced to become members at all.

But then again, a country founded on respecting the individual ain't exactly the club you make it to be.

What do you mean?

 

[Arianrhod]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

I only know what you post.

 

[Pop23]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

Sometimes the club membership is collected at the door, and the members aren't forced to become members at all.

But then again, a country founded on respecting the individual ain't exactly the club you make it to be.

What do you mean?

Forced participation in something should never be equated with "club" membership. It is a socialist marketing tool.

I guess, flipping the OP on its head......

Since I have contributed so much to other people's health care, and taken so little, are others morally obligated to pay me back?

Hmmmmmm, things that make you go hmmmm.

 

[dblack]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

I only know what you post.

Not even that. The debate isn't over paying dues, it's over how much power the "club" has over its members. We need government to protect our freedom to live our lives as we wish, not to take care of us and tell us how to live.

 

[Arianrhod]

Forced participation in something should never be equated with "club" membership.

A lot of people were threatening to move to Canada if Obama was reelected. They didn't, of course, but they had the option.

 

[dblack]

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

You clearly have no understanding of what I want.

Sometimes the club membership is collected at the door, and the members aren't forced to become members at all.

But then again, a country founded on respecting the individual ain't exactly the club you make it to be.

What do you mean?

Forced participation in something should never be equated with "club" membership. It is a socialist marketing tool.

I guess, flipping the OP on its head......

Since I have contributed so much to other people's health care, and taken so little, are others morally obligated to pay me back?

Hmmmmmm, things that make you go hmmmm.

Agreed. I find this notion of being 'indebted' to government particularly troubling, and the part of the welfare state that winds up being so authoritarian. If a given government "service" benefits some more than others, we should either get rid of it, or learn to live with it. Blaming the victim, and lording it over recipients of 'benefits' is a bad way to go, and makes me wonder about the motivation behind providing the benefits in the first place.

 

[Arianrhod]

I'll ask the same question here that I did in the other thread: How many of you raised the same objection to invading Iraq?

 

[dblack]

I'll ask the same question here that I did in the other thread: How many of you raised the same objection to invading Iraq?

Hmmm... not sure about the "same objection", as it seems like a very different issue, but I was adamantly opposed to invading Iraq.

 

[Conservative65]

Your own posts supporting social welfare programs and Obamacare subsidies. Are you claiming you don't support those things?

I support a strong, healthy America. It amazes me how many on the right don't. You don't mind paying the Waltons' taxes for them, though.

We can keep ourselves, and our communities, healthy without abusing the power of government.

Yes, we are.

Sadly, we are abusing government, by using it as a tool for mandating behavior. Authoritarian government isn't sustainable.

This reminds me of those Christians who invented the "War on Christmas" so they could blubber about how oppressed they were. I'd recommend the same cure for you: Take a trip to North Korea. Then tell use about "authoritarian government."

You want to be members of the club without paying dues. You're the real freeloaders.

I don't mind paying my dues and do. That's why I can use the things being a paying member of the club. Too many want to join the club and either not have to pay their dues to get the same or expect someone else to pay those dues for them because they can't.

If someone can't buy what I can buy, either get one of you so called compassionate bleeding hearts to do it for them or do without.

 

[Conservative65]

Forced participation in something should never be equated with "club" membership.

A lot of people were threatening to move to Canada if Obama was reelected. They didn't, of course, but they had the option.

Ever wonder what happened to all those celebrities who promised to leave the country if George W. Bush was elected president?


The original statements:

Eddie Vedder - "I'm moving to a different country if little Damien II gets elected." He did if you consider Hawaii a different country.

Alec Baldwin - was never quoted directly, but reportedly made a statement to his wife Kim Basinger, who was later quoted in Focus magazine saying that Alec "might leave the country if Bush is elected president ... and then I'd probably have to go too." Baldwin said his wife didn't speak to Focus magazine then later recanted which means admitted he lied.

Barbara Streisand - "I don't think you'll see me around here for at least four years." Streisand said that meant she wouldn't go to the White House. No great loss for anyone.

Robert Altman - "If George Bush is elected president, I'm leaving for France." Despite being caught on film saying that, Altman said he was misquoted.

Pierre Salinger - "If Bush wins, I'm going to leave the country and spend the rest of my life in France." He actually left and it's no great loss either.

 

[Arianrhod]

I've always thought that taxation should be allocated by taxpayer preference. I believe we'd be involved in far fewer wars, and the infrastructure in South Carolina would have been upgraded long before all that rainfall.

 

[LOki]

Right now there is someone who requires immediate medical care. That care will only be provided for payment. That someone has no money to pay it. You do. Are you not morally obligated to ensure that they receive the care they need?

No.

That was easy.

 

[dblack]

I've always thought that taxation should be allocated by taxpayer preference. I believe we'd be involved in far fewer wars, and the infrastructure in South Carolina would have been upgraded long before all that rainfall.

People allocating their money according to their preference isn't taxation. It's the free market. And you're right, if more money was allocated via taxpayer preference, and less via state mandate, there'd be far fewer wars and the things that matter most to us would get the most funding.

 

[Arianrhod]

I've always thought that taxation should be allocated by taxpayer preference. I believe we'd be involved in far fewer wars, and the infrastructure in South Carolina would have been upgraded long before all that rainfall.

People allocating their money according to their preference isn't taxation. It's the free market. And you're right, if more money was allocated via taxpayer preference, and less via state mandate, there'd be far fewer wars and the things that matter most to us would get the most funding.

While I agree with the rest of your post, I don't see how preferential taxation could be considered the free market, because it would have to be delimited by saying "You have to pay x-amount of tax, but check one or more of the following boxes to decide where you want your taxes to go."

In a true free market, there'd always be clowns who said "I ain't paying taxes at all."

 

[dblack]

I've always thought that taxation should be allocated by taxpayer preference. I believe we'd be involved in far fewer wars, and the infrastructure in South Carolina would have been upgraded long before all that rainfall.

People allocating their money according to their preference isn't taxation. It's the free market. And you're right, if more money was allocated via taxpayer preference, and less via state mandate, there'd be far fewer wars and the things that matter most to us would get the most funding.

While I agree with the rest of your post, I don't see how preferential taxation could be considered the free market ...

Which means you don't really agree with the rest of my post, eh?

because it would have to be delimited by saying "You have to pay x-amount of tax, but check one or more of the following boxes to decide where you want your taxes to go."

Right, which I wouldn't call accurately representing preferences, as many taxpayers would prefer to spend their money on things not in any of the 'boxes'.

In a true free market, there'd always be clowns who said "I ain't paying taxes at all."

Why is why taxes can't be allocated according to taxpayer preference. Government just doesn't work that way. Government is for those social concerns where it can't be left to individual preference; when conformity is truly necessary.