Originally posted by dadudemon
It's a shame whitey didn't and probably still doesn't get it on some parts of the South.
Well Egyptians still had slaves to do other jobs. But jobs which required precision, knowledge and skill were paid for.
I'm guessing it was like that everywhere... including USA, no?
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Well Egyptians still had slaves to do other jobs. But jobs which required precision, knowledge and skill were paid for.I'm guessing it was like that everywhere... including USA, no?
Nope. A**holes had slaves doing anything. Engineers, excavators, inventors, manufacturers, anything.
O, the hypocrisy of the southern slave owner declaring the negro as inferior when they themselves couldn't do many of the jobs they forced their slaves to do: both physical and intellectual.
Great system, great man who put it all together.
Medicare
The benefits in australia are endless.Wikipedia says that the USA has the same system for people over 65.
Why not make it uniform like Australia, cut the money making privatization and get on with helping people i say.
I think, it's a sad state of affairs when the government allows people to make money off sick people to the extent that the US Insurance companies etc do.
Originally posted by KidRock
And so we have conflicting opinions, thus is life. I feel people should keep what they work for, you believe middle class workers should have their money taken from them to help pay for an illegal immigrants health care.I don't know who you mean by "we all" either.
"we all" referred to nearly everyone in this thread, as it seems you are about the only person who doesn't prefer a single payer system (dadudemon's status is unknown).
Originally posted by dadudemon
Nope. A**holes had slaves doing anything. Engineers, excavators, inventors, manufacturers, anything.O, the hypocrisy of the southern slave owner declaring the negro as inferior when they themselves couldn't do many of the jobs they forced their slaves to do: both physical and intellectual.
If that's true, then infrastructure in the South is poor, roads are not built properly and dangerous and driving around minefield in Afghanistan is safer than driving anywhere in the south.
The government buildings are falling apart and crushing people left right and centre.
Northerners must have invented school for those professions to extract money from unsuspected Northern children and their parents.
Engineering and architecture is actually piss easy to do.
United Arab Emirates must be very confused - they're paying big bucks for professionals to come build up Dubai, when they can just import some slaves to do it for free.
Shows you what they know of economics, eh?
Originally posted by King Kandy
Funny how you once told me that I used too many strawman arguments, when you are far more guilty of that tactic."we all" referred to nearly everyone in this thread, as it seems you are about the only person who doesn't prefer a single payer system (dadudemon's status is unknown).
I've voiced my opinion already on it.
I'm all for it if it improves the situation.
I summed it up to my extremely Republican boss:
If the rest of the civilized word is using a hybrid system of public and private healthcare and most seem to be doing better than we are, what do we have to lose when we spend more than double what our nearest civilized neighbor does, per person?
More to the point:
IF we experience a net improvement on the current healthcare system, then it worked. It MUST make a significant improvement, though, in order for it to work. There MUST be a significant change in order for this to work. I admire the healthcare systems in France and Switzerland. Not so much the UK or Australian systems, but I hear that Australia's has had some improvement in the last decade.
So, I am for public healthcare, 6 out of 10 times. Not all the way convinced, but more sure than I'm not that it is the best for this nation.
I find the people speaking out so hotly against it in the town hall meetings to be very retarded and ignorant. I want to put a bullet in their heads, not because of the politics of the discussion, but because of how stupid and ignorant they are. I could do without that stupidity: you know, the same stupidity that said Obama was a Muslim, thinking that it's some sort of insult. Oh the ignorance is overwhelming. Of course, I'm not serious. I don't want to actually put a bullet in their head. I am surrounded by them in this good ol' state of Oklahoma. I have quite a few politically ignorant friends. 🙁 It's the nature of the geographic, man.
Originally posted by KidRock
Except when it comes to health care, that's free 😛
That would have been valid point if I had said in my previous post that we should employ untrained doctors off the street to do some medical practising for free.
And if we're to follow such trend why have police force for free? Or firemen?
You should have an insurance in case someone attacks you or kills you or your house starts burning.
(obviously it's free for under 18s, after that, pay your own damn police and firemen insurance.)
If you're being attacked and don't have police insurance - well tough shit. It's not MY responsibility to pay for someone else getting killed. And neither is government's. Why should government monopolize police - that would lead to a single police practice, regardless of what the situation is.
Not to mention bankrupt the country from the taxes it will take to pay for EVERYONE having protection, and police officers on almost EVERY corner.
The only thing we should actually get our taxes to pay for is arsenal and bureaucracy. Or maybe that could get privatised too...
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
That would have been valid point if I had said in my previous post that we should employ untrained doctors off the street to do some medical practising for free.And if we're to follow such trend why have police force for free? Or firemen?
You should have an insurance in case someone attacks you or kills you or your house starts burning.
(obviously it's free for under 18s, after that, pay your own damn police and firemen insurance.)If you're being attacked and don't have police insurance - well tough shit. It's not MY responsibility to pay for someone else getting killed. And neither is government's. Why should government monopolize police - that would lead to a single police practice, regardless of what the situation is.
Not to mention bankrupt the country from the taxes it will take to pay for EVERYONE having protection, and police officers on almost EVERY corner.The only thing we should actually get our taxes to pay for is arsenal and bureaucracy. Or maybe that could get privatised too...
I'm fairly certain that is what he believes. It's the heart of conservative economics.
It's true though.
And yeah, it is conservative policy because the stated goal of conservatism going back 400 years is to keep society just poor and desperate enough to where it can remain docile, hopeless, and toiling without trying to bring about any liberal reforms or combating the establishment. Systemic hopelessness, propaganda, lack of access to health care, and bad education is a great way to keep people from questioning order, protesting, or throwing Molotov cocktails.
Oh, and I disagree with your opinion. Tom Tomorrow is funnier than Bruce Tinsley and he's a better artist. Also his comics accurately reflect society and don't routinely act as an outlet for their creator's antisemitic characatures, unlike Mallard Fillmore.
Originally posted by Darth Jello
It's true though.And yeah, it is conservative policy because the stated goal of conservatism going back 400 years is to keep society just poor and desperate enough to where it can remain docile, hopeless, and toiling without trying to bring about any liberal reforms or combating the establishment. Systemic hopelessness, propaganda, lack of access to health care, and bad education is a great way to keep people from questioning order, protesting, or throwing Molotov cocktails.
Or to put it in terms that sound a bit less crazy. The ultimate goal of conservative economics is to limit the role of government as much as possible, but not necessarily to the point of removing it completely. What the potential results of it have no bearing on what the policies say.
Now I want to found the American Oppression Party and run on the platforms you've given just to see what happens.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Or to put it in terms that sound a bit less crazy. The ultimate goal of conservative economics is to limit the role of government as much as possible, but not necessarily to the point of removing it completely. What the potential results of it have no bearing on what the policies say.Now I want to found the American Oppression Party and run on the platforms you've given just to see what happens.
Actually I was going by the writings of Edmund Burke and Joseph de Maistre.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
That would have been valid point if I had said in my previous post that we should employ untrained doctors off the street to do some medical practising for free.And if we're to follow such trend why have police force for free? Or firemen?
You should have an insurance in case someone attacks you or kills you or your house starts burning.
(obviously it's free for under 18s, after that, pay your own damn police and firemen insurance.)If you're being attacked and don't have police insurance - well tough shit. It's not MY responsibility to pay for someone else getting killed. And neither is government's. Why should government monopolize police - that would lead to a single police practice, regardless of what the situation is.
Not to mention bankrupt the country from the taxes it will take to pay for EVERYONE having protection, and police officers on almost EVERY corner.The only thing we should actually get our taxes to pay for is arsenal and bureaucracy. Or maybe that could get privatised too...
Firefighters and police officers in a community are paid for by community property taxes. We are also paying them for a service that helps all of us. Even if my house is not burning down, I am paying the firefighters in case the time comes when I need them them to come put it out. Police are keeping us safe just by being out on the streets and having a presence.
What service is the heroin addict, that pays no taxes, providing for the country?
The heart of liberal policy is opression through means of dependability. This is what Jello and Kandy support.