Senate Special Election in MA

[Demosthenes11]

Figured you'd cop out, at least you acknowledge my intellectual superiority. Thanks!

see this is how people know you weren't trolling before.
when you actually try, you are bad at it

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

see this is how people know you weren't trolling before.
when you actually try, you are bad at it

You're still being trolled, can't be that bad

[Leif]

So you're against tax dollars being used for healthcare, which would protect, support, or defend someones well-being.

That's whats being supported. If it was a great wonderful government program that would be amazing in every way, a majority of the American people wouldn't be opposing it.

It will be more expensive. It will ration care. It will lower the quality of care.

In exchange, we cover more people.

Following this line of logic since firefighters and police use tax dollars to protect, support, or defend our well-being that this is theft and socialism and unconstitutional, right?

See above.

[Plow]

That's the problem. You seem to think its so important, people shouldn't be able to choose if they want it or not.

What the fuck are you talking about? Where did I ever say people should not be able to choose if they want end of life planning? The entire point of end of life planning is to make sure people have an *OPPORTUNITY*, not a requirement, to make those kinds of decisions for themselves before they're incapable.

The fact is, the only way to get the MOST GOODS of the HIGHEST QUALITY to the MOST PEOPLE is through the FREE MARKET.

If you don't allow that to happen, rationing occurs.

Which explains perfectly why the French get more, higher quality health insurance.


You really need to develop an understanding of the difference between public insurance and public medical care. You quite literally have no idea what's even going on.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

see this is how people know you weren't trolling before.
when you actually try, you are bad at it

By the by, stating a fact that makes someone mad is not trolling. "Trolling" is used way too loosely on BG to describe pretty much anything that anyone responds.

'Nigga you hit the quote button you got trolled'


terrible

[Demosthenes11]

I'm really bad at this so im just gonna keep this safe on my face

damn son u really are mad

[Leif]

What the fuck are you talking about? Where did I ever say people should not be able to choose if they want end of life planning? The entire point of end of life planning is to make sure people have an *OPPORTUNITY*, not a requirement, to make those kinds of decisions for themselves before they're incapable.

Yet people have the opportunity to buy end of life counseling if they want it.

You seem to think its so great, except it encounters the same problems we see with assisted suicide. There is a financial incentive (when the government runs it) to get people to stop using expensive treatments. That is a conflict of interest, especially when Democrats claim it will cut costs.

Which explains perfectly why the French get more, higher quality health insurance.

THIS IS NOT TRUE.

You really need to develop an understanding of the difference between public insurance and public medical care. You quite literally have no idea what's even going on.

What?! You think the French have higher quality health care. Even though this isn't true, even socialist France allows you to buy insurance across borders.

http://diannej.com/blog/wp-content/u...pedaling34.jpg

I point out the fact that you didn't understand the point and you respond with...

A BICYCLE!

Figured you'd cop out, at least you acknowledge my intellectual superiority. Thanks!

Hah.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Well, you're saying that the federal government and your tax dollars being used to protect, support, or defend someones well-being is theft and socialism and unconstitutional, right?

So you're against tax dollars being used for healthcare, which would protect, support, or defend someones well-being. Hence your argument is that healthcare should be regulated by the free market.

Following this line of logic since firefighters and police use tax dollars to protect, support, or defend our well-being that this is theft and socialism and unconstitutional, right?


Did I miss something, or did you make up your own rules and these are exceptions to those rules?

Oh Jesus.

So long as your protecting, supporting, or defending someones well-being it should be ok for a 3rd party to steal from one person in order to protect, support, or defend someone else's well-being right?

[Plow]

Yet people have the opportunity to buy end of life counseling if they want it.

You seem to think its so great, except it encounters the same problems we see with assisted suicide. There is a financial incentive (when the government runs it) to get people to stop using expensive treatments. That is a conflict of interest, especially when Democrats claim it will cut costs.

The government would be offering *PAYMENT* for the planning.

Not the actual service.

Again, figure out what the fuck you're talking about.

THIS IS NOT TRUE.

Percentage of French citizens insured: 100%. Percentage of U.S. citizens insured: about 85%. Guess what? That's more.

Percentage of personal health cost paid by French insurance: 75%. Percentage of personal health cost paid by U.S. insurance: 35%.

I dunno about you, but I know which of those sounds "better" to me.

What?! You think the French have higher quality health care. Even though this isn't true, even socialist France allows you to buy insurance across borders.

I didn't say they have higher quality health care. This bill is not about health care. It's about health insurance. There's absolutely no question whatsoever the French have better health insurance.


I'm done, when you can figure out the difference between medicine and insurance, you might have an opinion worth reading, but I doubt that just as much as I doubt the possibility of you figuring out what the fuck you're talking about in the first place.

[Rhinox]

Oh Jesus.

So long as your protecting, supporting, or defending someones well-being it should be ok for a 3rd party to steal from one person in order to protect, support, or defend someone else's well-being right?

This answer is funny.


change steal with spy and you can now see why the Patriot ACT (that Obama hasn't made overtures he will repeal btw) is hated by Progressives and Civil libertarians.


btw frankenbeans that Picture was of a man Backpedaling. Not surprised it went over your head.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Oh Jesus.

So long as your protecting, supporting, or defending someones well-being it should be ok for a 3rd party to steal from one person in order to protect, support, or defend someone else's well-being right?

So you think firefighters and police should be free market then, right?

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So you think firefighters and police should be free market then, right?

Whether I think it is irrelevant. Prior to my statement no one on this board had yet to argue it. But to entertain you, I think firefighting would do just fun w/o govt. intervention. My Gma still has her emblem from when it was and it worked just fine for her generation.

Police, I honestly don't know about.

But this has nothing to do with health-care, your comparing apples to oranges, state govt. vs. federal govt.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Whether I think it is irrelevant. Prior to my statement no one on this board had yet to argue it. But to entertain you, I think firefighting would do just fun w/o govt. intervention. My Gma still has her emblem from when it was and it worked just fine for her generation.

Police, I honestly don't know about.

But this has nothing to do with health-care, your comparing apples to oranges, state govt. vs. federal govt.

Don't both governments tax? Which is theft in your opinion?

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Don't both governments tax? Which is theft in your opinion?

With a clear distinction for civil servants, when you take money from one person involuntarily in order to give to another. Or to phrase it another way, when you force one person to work for the benefit of another against their will. But I think we all know that's not theft, it's something else.

[Talint]

http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/blog...s/speeches.jpg

I don't know what else this bar encapsulates. I guess a cut to commercial break counts as time cut out of the speech, since I doubt they'd go back to it. I do know that Coakley's concession speech couldn't have been more than ten minutes, and that Brown went on for at least thirty, since he rambling on about how single his daughters were.

I understand that the only way to measure something like "liberal media bias" is to judge the content on it, but I think that, if it exists it is more of a reflection of the greater populous at large. Or, if something more cynical, something that's manufactured by a corporate media bias as opposed to "liberal" one. This would include Fox News.

edited to add

There's also a problem of trying to measure said "liberal media bias", as there is no control group to measure it against. You have to measure the supposed "right-leaning" channels (since we're talking about cable news in this instance) against "left-leaning" ones.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

With a clear distinction for civil servants, when you take money from one person involuntarily in order to give to another. Or to phrase it another way, when you force one person to work for the benefit of another against their will. But I think we all know that's not theft, it's something else.

So public schools, public transit, mail, police, firefighters, national guard ( disaster relief ) et al, which is funded by tax dollars, is theft?

By the way, when your grandmother had a voluntary firefighter squad back in the day all they had to do was run a wooden bugg over to the general store or the saloon. That system is clearly inefficient by todays standards and technology.

Uncle Cletus could build that buggy in a fortnight. He can't however, build fire engines or the proper tools used to save lives in todays infrastructure. I can't believe you even brought that up.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So public schools, public transit, mail, police, firefighters, national guard ( disaster relief ) et al, which is funded by tax dollars, is theft?

By the way, when your grandmother had a voluntary firefighter squad back in the day all they had to do was run a wooden bugg over to the general store or the saloon. That system is clearly inefficient by todays standards and technology.

Uncle Cletus could build that buggy in a fortnight. He can't however, build fire engines or the proper tools used to save lives in todays infrastructure. I can't believe you even brought that up.

Edit: "Times have changed" is no argument for govt. involvement. If the govt. can do it anyone can.

When the govt. takes the earnings of one American and merely gives it to another it's theft. Calling it a tax doesn't change this fact. If you were talking about food stamps for instance, clearly it's theft. You are literally taking the earnings of one person and giving them to another. In your examples, it seems your trying to make a distinction between handing someone 100 dollars and spending that 100 dollars on a service for that person. The only difference I see is the government spending the money vs. letting the other person spend it. That does not change whether it's theft.

So what do I consider theft? When the government goes beyond the powers granted to it in the constitution.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Edit: "Times have changed" is no argument for govt. involvement. If the govt. can do it anyone can.

When the govt. takes the earnings of one American and merely gives it to another it's theft. Calling it a tax doesn't change this fact. If you were talking about food stamps for instance, clearly it's theft. You are literally taking the earnings of one person and giving them to another. In your examples, it seems your trying to make a distinction between handing someone 100 dollars and spending that 100 dollars on a service for that person. The only difference I see is the government spending the money vs. letting the other person spend it. That does not change whether it's theft.

So what do I consider theft? When the government goes beyond the powers granted to it in the constitution.

So if we're paying doctors and nurses to do the same thing that police, firefighters, and the military are doing - how is this theft?

[Kuya]

Funnier than this thread, is the democrats (no doubt blue dogs) saying that they've been too far left and they need to get back to the center.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So if we're paying doctors and nurses to do the same thing that police, firefighters, and the military are doing - how is this theft?

My last paragraph. The latter are all constitutional. When the govt. takes money for unconstitutional purposes, it's theft. That's my view of it.