23 Sep 14
Originally posted by WajomaWell I assume you are not referring to Eritrea, Israel has a mixture of private, semi-private and state entities providing health care. Based on the Wikipedia page it is regulated. I don't think either support your statement. So find an example of a fully private health care system which is cheaper than any or most of the state provided ones, has little or no regulation, and provides high quality health care. I think you were making up your facts.
This is the link you supplied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_%28PPP%29_per_capita
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraNo. I suggest that individuals be encouraged to improve their ability to earn and pay for basic housing and health care.
So you suggest redistribution up to the point where even the poorest can afford adequate quality private health care?
You seem to suggest that redistribution is the only method of humans improving themselves. Does it all end in Randian distopia of Anthem?
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraOK, but in the US we have multiple police departments, from the Feds; The FBI, DEA, Secret Service, DHS, NSA, and closer to home State Police, County Sheriffs, Town, City, and tribal cops. Are we safer due to the multiplicity of police agencies?
Indeed, but that does not exempt you from paying taxes to pay for the police.
At the intersection closest to my home four cities share jurisdiction. You want to be in an accident there?
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by normbenignYou seem to blame the poor for being poor.
No. I suggest that individuals be encouraged to improve their ability to earn and pay for basic housing and health care.
You seem to suggest that redistribution is the only method of humans improving themselves. Does it all end in Randian distopia of Anthem?
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraYes I do, because most studies indicate that the poor are not the same decade after decade. Many move to middle class and some become wealthy. Many wealthy squander their wealth and become poor.
You seem to blame the poor for being poor.
Being poor doesn't mean staying poor, but bad decisions tend to be the reasons why people stay poor in the US. Several reasons for staying poor include criminal behavior, youthful sexual activity and pregnancy, failure to marry, use of recreational drugs, premature end of education, and finally laziness. Sometimes a combination of the preceding.
The poor aren't all just unlucky, or of poor parents.
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraIf you like, guess I must be ubermensch too because I decided how much sugar to put on my cornflakes this morning, even though you were still free to put as much, or as little sugar on your cornies, or you might choose not to have cornflakes at all.
And the role of the state is determined by Übermensch Wajoma.
23 Sep 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThey deserve to die if they make choices that lead to death. Yes.
Not all of them. Some of them. And they deserve to die, according to you. Nice to see your true colours.
The alternative is to make innocent people responsible for the bad choices of others.
You might like to advise people to eat better and get out from behind their computer and get some exercise but you may not steal their computer, force feed them and chain them to a treadmill set on 10.
24 Sep 14
Originally posted by DeepThoughtLooks like you've just introduced new criteria. This should be a lesson to you about comparing apples and oranges.
Well I assume you are not referring to Eritrea, Israel has a mixture of private, semi-private and state entities providing health care. Based on the Wikipedia page it is regulated. I don't think either support your statement. So find an example of a fully private health care system which is cheaper than any or most of the state provided ones, has lit ...[text shortened]... or no regulation, and provides high quality health care. I think you were making up your facts.
Thousands of people travel to places like the Philippines and Thailand for all sorts of medical procedures.
24 Sep 14
Originally posted by Wajomaby your argument, if you are fired because the company wants to cover loses caused by poor business planing, you deserve to starve.
They deserve to die if they make choices that lead to death. Yes.
The alternative is to make innocent people responsible for the bad choices of others.
You might like to advise people to eat better and get out from behind their computer and get some exercise but you may not steal their computer, force feed them and chain them to a treadmill set on 10.
you deserve to go bankrupt even though the pharmaceutical companies drive up the prices to unreasonable levels.
and you would be right, you would deserve to die, karma being a bitch and all. yet there are people who are entirely decent people, unlike you, who deserve help when at their weakest so they become productive members of society yet again.
24 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziIf a pharmaceutical company jacks it's prices to unreasonable levels they go bust. (zahalanzi showing his economic nous again) A big part of the price in developing drugs is trying to get them by the FDA, but you being a state worshipper, well, you will have just closed your eyes and clamped your ears shut.
by your argument, if you are fired because the company wants to cover loses caused by poor business planing, you deserve to starve.
you deserve to go bankrupt even though the pharmaceutical companies drive up the prices to unreasonable levels.
and you would be right, you would deserve to die, karma being a bitch and all. yet there are people who a ...[text shortened]... , who deserve help when at their weakest so they become productive members of society yet again.
The number of truly helpless people is small, people are more resourceful than you give them credit for, no news there, lefties have a exceedingly poor opinion of their fellow man and his ability to live his own life. There are people with incredible physical disabilities making their own way, supporting their own selves.
I agree there are decent people that need help, and there are still many more decent people who could do with the states foot off their throat.
Let's agree on that then: There are decent people that need help. We'll put that to one side for the moment.
Should decent people be forced to pay for the poor choices of the other folk? The reckless, the careless, the thoughtless, the straight out evil.
24 Sep 14
Originally posted by Wajoma"If a pharmaceutical company jacks it's prices to unreasonable levels they go bust"
If a pharmaceutical company jacks it's prices to unreasonable levels they go bust. (zahalanzi showing his economic nous again) A big part of the price in developing drugs is trying to get them by the FDA, but you being a state worshipper, well, you will have just closed your eyes and clamped your ears shut.
The number of truly helpless people is small, pe ...[text shortened]... r choices of the other folk? The reckless, the careless, the thoughtless, the straight out evil.
unless they agree among themselves to jack up their prices equally, which they did and do. not surprised you've shown us your economic myopy again
"The number of truly helpless people is small"
that's because you don't understand what you read. there are many people deemed poor and there are even more people who make a dollar above the poverty line that are considered middle class.
"There are people with incredible physical disabilities making their own way, supporting their own selves."
there are people who can wiggle their ears. this is just as relevant as the above statement.
"Should decent people be forced to pay for the poor choices of the other
folk?"
how do you define reckless, careless, thoughtless, evil. do you have an evil measuring stick?
all people must pay taxes. all agree on that. you just consider those taxes should be divided to people YOU deem worthy. you don't allow the possibility that others might be worthy as well. you put those in the pile of people who made poor choices, who are lazy.
so the question remains:
is a 9/11 (let's say construction worker) first responder who most certainly doesn't afford the full premium awesome medical insurance lazy? even if he is covered by his employer for injuries sustained on the job, he was in his free time while "first responding" so his medical bills won't be covered. do you find him evil? careless? thoughtless?
come to think of it, he was thoughtless. when his country was suffering, he didn't have thoughts of his safety, he didn't think of where he would get the money to cover hospital bills. he only knew there weren't enough people clearing the rubble and there might be people trapped under there.
24 Sep 14
Originally posted by ZahlanziWe've been through that scenario a dozen times.
"If a pharmaceutical company jacks it's prices to unreasonable levels they go bust"
unless they agree among themselves to jack up their prices equally, which they did and do. not surprised you've shown us your economic myopy again
"The number of truly helpless people is small"
that's because you don't understand what you read. there are many people d ...[text shortened]... w there weren't enough people clearing the rubble and there might be people trapped under there.
We've been through the 9/11 scenario a dozen times. People should not be forced to contribute because:
1/ Initiating force and threats of force is evil.
2/ It is not your position in life to force your idea of morality on others.
3/ State enforced 'charity' kills true charity and benevolence.
Also I don't want my taxes to be "divided to people YOU deem worthy" Everyone should pay less tax.