Liberal Cowards.

"Life, Libery & the Pursuit of Happiness."

People can't have that when their coverage is denied and they have to either find tens of thousands of dollars, or die.

If you can show me how the free market has worked itself out with regard to healthcare, I'm all ears. As it is, the problems are just getting worse & more pronounced.

What do you think that Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is? Do you think it is relying on the government to provide healthcare? Did you ever ask why healthcare is so expensive? Why do so many people think that the government owes them healthcare?
 
What do you think that Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is? Do you think it is relying on the government to provide healthcare? Did you ever ask why healthcare is so expensive? Why do so many people think that the government owes them healthcare?

I have yet to see a plan where the government "provides healthcare."

Wanna try again on that?
 
I have yet to see a plan where the government "provides healthcare."

Wanna try again on that?

I never said that the government provided healthcare, but what do you think Universal Healthcare is? That is what Hillary and Obama want to force on the American public.

"Life, Libery & the Pursuit of Happiness."

If you can show me how the free market has worked itself out with regard to
healthcare, I'm all ears. As it is, the problems are just getting worse & more pronounced.

People can't have that when their coverage is denied and they have to either find tens of thousands of dollars, or die.

If you can show me how the free market has worked itself out with regard to healthcare, I'm all ears. As it is, the problems are just getting worse & more pronounced.​

According to what you said, people cannot have "Life, Libery & the Pursuit of Happiness" if their coverage is denied and they have to find tens of thousands of dollars or die. Normally, the medical procedure is completed then a bill is sent. I have not seen people shoved out of hospitals because of the inability to pay. In fact, I believe that is against the law.

The problem seems to be that health insurance is so high. Why is that? Lawyers will sue a doctor at the drop of a hat. Do you think that might have something to do with the high cost of medical care?
 
When you speak about taxation so the government can provide things like healthcare, all you are doing is giving more money to people that will only work hard enough to do the job that is assigned to them. They do not care about your life forever. While they might enter the job with much enthusiasm and the intent to save the world, after a few years, they will just want to get the paperwork completed so they can get home to watch reruns of "Lost" If you keep giving the government more and more of your money 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80% to provide the essentials for life, food, housing, healthcare, a job, whatever... you are becoming more and more dependent and less and less independent. There are less and less choices available and therefore less freedom. If you want healthcare to become nothing more than an office resembling a division the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), give the government total control of your health. Regardless of Political Party, when has the government ever done anything efficiently. They are always over budget by 300-500% at a minimum. Whatever they say it is going to cost, it will cost much, much more. And who pays for that... the taxpayers. Who will control the spending of the government with regards to social programs. Well... it will not be the taxpayers.

What do you call someone that works and hands over the fruits of their labor to someone else to receive what is needed to live, i.e. housing, food, healthcare, etc...? Does this sound like Dependency or Independence? Reliance or Self-reliance? Being owned or Free to live and choose for yourself?

No one in America is taxed at a rate of 50%, much less 80%. The Keynesian curve (that Laffer stole) breaks off far before 50%. So your argument is pretty much null.
 
And of course, here makes the appearance of the classic right wing lie that the government is 1000% inefficient or something, a number that they pulled straight out of their nether regions.
 
What do you think that Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is? Do you think it is relying on the government to provide healthcare? Did you ever ask why healthcare is so expensive? Why do so many people think that the government owes them healthcare?

Why do so many people think the government doesn't owe them healthcare?
 
No one in America is taxed at a rate of 50%, much less 80%. The Keynesian curve (that Laffer stole) breaks off far before 50%. So your argument is pretty much null.

Under President Carter, the top tax rate was 70%. Reagan brought it down. Bill Clinton raised it during his first year. President Bush dropped it. Obama will certainly increase the rate as high as he can.
 
And of course, here makes the appearance of the classic right wing lie that the government is 1000% inefficient or something, a number that they pulled straight out of their nether regions.

Fine, give me an example of the efficiency of the government's ability to spend. Show me a bill that did not cost much more than 100% of what was predicted when the bill was passed by Congress.
 
Show me a document where the government is responsible for everyone's healthcare.

There is no document, but we have to change with the times, to not change is stasis, and we know what happens then!
 
Absolutely not. Are you saying that you do?

What is the role of government? The role of government should be to provide for the general public what the individual cannot provide for themselves. For example, a military. The individual cannot provide an effective military. Building roads is another good example. Providing a good primary education for the population is another example.

We had schools before we had our current education system.

Once you start the social programs where do you stop ?

Let the sick poor children or the elderly be denied health care ?

Food for the poor ? Housing ?

tell me where does it stop ?
 
We had schools before we had our current education system.

Once you start the social programs where do you stop ?

Let the sick poor children or the elderly be denied health care ?

Food for the poor ? Housing ?

tell me where does it stop ?

It is hard to believe that you are actually opposed to public education as is suggested in the tone of this post. In fact, I think this is nothing more than a troll. But I will show you the courtesy of offering you an answer.

What is the purpose of government? Well, the purpose of government is to provide for the individual what the individual cannot provide for themselves. It is not to provide everything that everyone wants.

The public education system was established so as to set a minimum standard of education for children to equip them to live as productive members of society when they are adults.

Providing a good or even an adequate education for children is something that is beyond the abilities of most parents.

You are absolutely right. Once you start providing social programs, where do you stop? And here is the answer to that question. You stop where the individual can provide the necessary service on their own.

No one gets turned away when entering a hospital. Perhaps you have heard of Medicare. It is for the elderly and children in certain cases.

Food for the poor... Are you kidding. Have you ever hear of food stamps? Ever hear of Public housing. There are all kinds of programs that are temporary that are in place for just this problem. Maybe you have not seen how overweight most Americans are... even the poor. And here is something you may not know... We have the "richest" poor people in the world. Most people living below the poverty line have a color TV, a car, and a cellphone, receive food stamps, and are able to go to school free of charge.

You can argue that housing projects are not great and you would be right. But they are not paying for it either, are they. If they want a better neighborhood, perhaps they should do what it takes to make their own way in the world and get off the dole. This would make room for those that really need it. They need to shed the entitlement mentality that is the real scourge that keeps people poor, uneducated, and unable to live on their own without assistance.

It would be a safe bet that most of the people are in the position to be there because of poor decisions on their part. For instance, having babies before marriage and/or without the ability to afford to raise a family, dropping out of a school that is provided for them free of charge - all they have to do is to show up before the bell rings and do some homework.

Where does it stop? It stops at personal responsibility and education. Education as mentioned earlier, is provided for no cost, however, it does require a certain effort on the part of the student. This comes under personal responsibility.

The question should not be where does it stop, but rather why does it continue? It continues with enslavement to entitlements, with the entitlement mentality that says 'we are owed this welfare and these government checks'. It ends with getting rid of the poor work ethic that allows one to settle for government handouts and the lifestyle that accompanies it courtesy of the taxpayers.
 
Under President Carter, the top tax rate was 70%. Reagan brought it down. Bill Clinton raised it during his first year. President Bush dropped it. Obama will certainly increase the rate as high as he can.

The post-war tax rates fluctuated between 90% and 70%. This held true in the Eisenhower and Nixon administrations, and the highest tax burden of all time was actually during Eisenhower. JFK cut it.

Obama may raise taxes on the rich, possibly to 40% or so. A 5% tax increase. Overall his tax plan is a cut.
 
Back
Top