(August 13, 2009 at 2:33 pm)LukeMC Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 1:08 pm)Tiberius Wrote: As a Libertarian I believe it is the government's responsibility to protect the lives of its citizens, ergo public healthcare should be a top agenda. Private healthcare should also exist to cater to those who wish to use it. Whilst public healthcare will be a basic service (as in no perks other than good healthcare), the private healthcare business would provide those perks (such as private rooms, personal doctors, etc) for a price.

Would this mean the rich people pay taxes towards a service they won't use, and then go on to pay again for a service they will?

As a Libertarian I believe that everyone should be in charge of their own health care. If someone doesn't make enough money to afford health care then oh well. I work for my money and they should do the same. I don't work to give healthcare to other people who can't afford it. I don't mind the elderly getting a free ride when it comes to health care. I also don't mind if mentally or physically retarded people or disabled people get a free ride with health care. I do care that I have to pay for health care for lazy people and women who use their vagina as a baby factory. I have hardly ever had health care in my life. If I needed a doctor I paid for it out of pocket. I didn't go around whining because someone else wouldn't use their taxes to pay for it. How can a Libertarian expect the government to pay for our health care?

I think that if we are going to have govt. health care this is how it should work. Each WORKER can opt to pay part of their taxes toward health care and in turn they can use the government health care if they choose to. If not they can get their own insurance. If one chooses not to pay taxes toward it then they don't reap the benefits. This is how social security should be handled. If you don't have a job and aren't going to get one then oh well.....you just don't get health care. Pay taxes into it or go without.

There were a couple of Americans on UK Radio 2 today discussing the US debate that incudes judgement of the UK system. I thought it interesting that one said "social" equates to communism in the US. The US zeitgeist is incredibly selfish she went on to say (my precis). The American way is to think "I made it, so should anyone else who wants anything".

No comment. I just thought the view interesting.

(August 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm)dry land fish Wrote: I don't work to give healthcare to other people who can't afford it. I don't mind the elderly getting a free ride when it comes to health care. I also don't mind if mentally or physically retarded people or disabled people get a free ride with health care. I do care that I have to pay for health care for lazy people and women who use their vagina as a baby factory.

And who gets to be the judge of who's a fat lazy bastard and who's giggity is a baby factory? You maybe?

You already seem to have a list of acceptable recipients of a healthy life. What if I don't want to give elderly the free ride? What if I want the eligible unemployed to receive free healthcare?

Why stop there? I support free healthcare for all.

(August 13, 2009 at 6:42 pm)Dotard Wrote: Why stop there? I support free healthcare for all.

Me fucking too. Absolutely, a given.

EvF

(August 13, 2009 at 6:46 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 6:42 pm)Dotard Wrote: Why stop there? I support free healthcare for all.

Me fucking too. Absolutely, a given.

EvF

Me too.

---

Adrian/dry land fish....would you care to argue your differing positions ( as Libertarians ) on this issue?

I agree pretty much with Libertarianism. On the whole it sounds great. One gripe I do have with it though is that if this government was Libertarian it's possible I might not be here today, because there might have not been any intervention when I was kind of 'out of it'. Because I might be 'given the right' to 'do as I please' when it comes to 'my own life' - but I wasn't fit to be doing so and I'm so very glad that there was intervention. And so I'm not sure if there would be one in libertarianism?

I can't remember much from where it was discussed on another thread, but there was part of it that I didn't like the sound of due to this possibility.

EvF

(August 13, 2009 at 1:08 pm)Tiberius Wrote: As a Libertarian I believe it is the government's responsibility to protect the lives of its citizens, ergo public healthcare should be a top agenda. Private healthcare should also exist to cater to those who wish to use it. Whilst public healthcare will be a basic service (as in no perks other than good healthcare), the private healthcare business would provide those perks (such as private rooms, personal doctors, etc) for a price.

Adrian, you asked me lots of questions about Socialism in another thread, so I'd like to pose you a few.
How would a Libertarian government tackle poverty, unemployment, the pensions timebomb and the resulting need for care for an increasingly old population, inequality i.e. the ever widening gap between the rich and the poor, global warming?
Just a few things to consider.

(August 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm)dry land fish Wrote: If someone doesn't make enough money to afford health care then oh well. I work for my money and they should do the same. I don't work to give healthcare to other people who can't afford it.

I don't know how the hell you dare. Where are you actually from? You DO understand that if you're born to a poor family, go to school in a socially and ecomically deprived area and have to drop out early without a proper education just so that you can help support your family with the scabbiest minimum wage job you can get your unqualified hands on, this doesn't mean you don't "work for your money". There's a damned good reason why a LOT of otherwise decent people are on a low wage bracket and it's got nothing to do with laziness. You have some nerve. Not to mention the fact that not everybody is born with a sharp enough brain to play their way up the system on the backs of everyone around them. There are a lot of genuine people who aren't equipped well enough to deal with particle physics in university, and instead try to make an honest wage in a long-houred, poorly-paid, nightmarish hell-hole of a job just so they can come home to a semi-warm bed and get rested up for the next day.

What happens to the couple who are happily married for 20 years and then the wife kicks out her husband leaving him with no home to go to and no car to drive in? And when he's surmounting debt because the Child Support Agency are billing him money his job can't support? Should he be punished for the unfortunate circumstances he got pushed into? His job isn't the easiest, he drives up and down the country with his team of co-workers providing a valuable service to communities everywhere, but the work isn't stable. He only gets called to work when it's available and can go for months without it. Now he's getting really broke, but he's trying his goddamned hardest to save up for a birthday present for his son. How dare you call these honest people lazy.

But maybe he could have gotten a better job if he tried harder? Think again. Raised in a socially and economically deprived area, this man didn't have the luxury of going to college or putting aside money for investment. He was straight out of school and straight to the chicken factory to help support his mother who had been made redundant. Taking jobs as and when they came, he eventually worked his way to where he is now through nothing but hard labour. If he was born in a moderately wealthy area, perhaps he'd have had a fighting chance at making something of himself.

I'm sorry to be like this, but what you're saying has hit too close to home. I have a lot of friends and family members who are honest, hard working people who by the foul luck of being born in these old mining suburbs, have had no real opportunities to make it big. They've worked damned hard to support themselves and I don't appreciate you sitting on your throne calling honest people "lazy" as if they CHOSE to be born here and have unfortunately poor families and be stuck in low paid jobs in which they work their asses off to support themselves and their loved ones. As I've said before in this thread, it's through my mothers blood, sweat and tears that I can even be here on this forum for hours out of the day. You'll have to tell me how "working oneself to the point of clinical depression" equates to "being lazy and not working for money".

And again, it's not as if my mother could have made anything of herself. She tried very hard in school and was offered a place in the sixth form. She had to turn it down. Her parents were out of work.

Have a little fucking respect. These people could just as easily quit their jobs and leech off the state. But they don't, they have a little more dignity than that, and the taxes from their hard-earned paychecks are what help keep your roads, railways, police force, fire brigade and (in the UK and other places) you're human right to health.

We're all trying here.

And don't come back with something to the effect of "well okay, I'll admit there are some HONEST poor people who really do try, but I was thinking about the GENUINELY lazy people who leech off the state and do no work and so choose to". Yeah, so lets punish the honest people some more.

On the other hand, I actually know a few families living off state benefits. Why do they do this? I'll ignore those who are genuinely disabled. There's one guy whose school career was destroyed when his father died. Another guy who had rough parents and ended up getting into drinking and drugs, but came clean and genuinely wanted to change his ways, but after months of job hunting he couldn't even get an interview and had to fall back to the state after his parents kicked him out of his house and had him living in a tent in a field which was burned down one night by youths. Then there are two families with widowed wives who had to quit their jobs to look after the kids now their father wasn't around. Heck, even my neighbour across the road is claiming benefits.

None of these people are lazy, nor are they leeches. They're genuine people in tough situations who need us to help get them back on their feet. And just when they need us the most, just when they're in the hospital waiting room awaiting much-needed treatment, you're going to tell them "too bad, you're a lazy ass. pay for it yourself. OH WAIT, you can't. OH WELL. Shoulda worked harder."

You make me sick. Even if there are a reasonable amount of genuinely, indebatably lazy leeches on the state, this doesn't mean we should punish the honest people for their misfortune. It'd be like punching every atheist in the face just because the Rational Response Squad were being unwarrantedly cruel towards their christian adversaries. I'm an atheist but I didn't do anything to deserve a punch. Catch my drift?

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK.

Well I'm glad that's over.

(August 13, 2009 at 6:42 pm)Dotard Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm)dry land fish Wrote: I don't work to give healthcare to other people who can't afford it. I don't mind the elderly getting a free ride when it comes to health care. I also don't mind if mentally or physically retarded people or disabled people get a free ride with health care. I do care that I have to pay for health care for lazy people and women who use their vagina as a baby factory.

And who gets to be the judge of who's a fat lazy bastard and who's giggity is a baby factory? You maybe?

You already seem to have a list of acceptable recipients of a healthy life. What if I don't want to give elderly the free ride? What if I want the eligible unemployed to receive free healthcare?

Why stop there? I support free healthcare for all.

I come from a poor area and I see welfare people sitting around having babies purely for money. I should have the right to control what my tax dollars pay for. I don't work to pay for everyone. I work to pay for myself and my family. I see nothing wrong with the system the way it is. My step father is retired because he's had three heart attacks and two open heart surgeries among other ailments. His social security disability gives him the best care in hospitals that I've seen. It's better than my old health insurance policy that my old employer gave me. When I had health insurance I paid a private company to give me insurance. I don't have a problem with "free" health care as long as one can choose whether or not they want to contribute to it. If you want to pay extra taxes out of your paycheck to go into this fund then by all means you should be able to get your government health care.

Basically what I'm saying is that I don't want the government to run my health care coverage so I'd like to not be forced to pay into such a fund that I don't even want to use. I'm already paying for social security and I'm sure I won't even be able to use it when I'm old because it will be depleted.

---

(August 13, 2009 at 6:59 pm)bozo Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 6:46 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 6:42 pm)Dotard Wrote: Why stop there? I support free healthcare for all.

Me fucking too. Absolutely, a given.

EvF

Me too.

---

Adrian/dry land fish....would you care to argue your differing positions ( as Libertarians ) on this issue?

Well Adrians view is actually not the view of your textbook Libertarian. Libertarians are for smaller government and lower taxes. We are anti welfare which also means we are anti free health care. I don't care if working tax paying citizens get free health care if they pay into the system. I can't understand why people want free loaders to live off of us. I'm not busting my butt in college so I can be taxed to death to pay for people who are too lazy to make something of themselves. We still have that system today. People are on welfare today and when a woman who has little or no money gets pregnant they get FREE health care for their delivery and their kid can still get free health care. Libertarians are for responsible personal choices. Being responsible would be not having kids you can't afford. It's not the tax payers place to pay for everyone. Maybe I have this view because of the poor area I grew up living in. White trash rednecks who barely have a high school education who sit around in their mobile homes on food stamps having babies for a check. I've actually HEARD young teenage girls say "well i'll just have me a baby and I won't have to work". I do not want to continue supporting that mentality.

---

(August 13, 2009 at 7:25 pm)LukeMC Wrote:

(August 13, 2009 at 5:22 pm)dry land fish Wrote: If someone doesn't make enough money to afford health care then oh well. I work for my money and they should do the same. I don't work to give healthcare to other people who can't afford it.

I don't know how the hell you dare. Where are you actually from? You DO understand that if you're born to a poor family, go to school in a socially and ecomically deprived area and have to drop out early without a proper education just so that you can help support your family with the scabbiest minimum wage job you can get your unqualified hands on, this doesn't mean you don't "work for your money". There's a damned good reason why a LOT of otherwise decent people are on a low wage bracket and it's got nothing to do with laziness. You have some nerve. Not to mention the fact that not everybody is born with a sharp enough brain to play their way up the system on the backs of everyone around them. There are a lot of genuine people who aren't equipped well enough to deal with particle physics in university, and instead try to make an honest wage in a long-houred, poorly-paid, nightmarish hell-hole of a job just so they can come home to a semi-warm bed and get rested up for the next day.

What happens to the couple who are happily married for 20 years and then the wife kicks out her husband leaving him with no home to go to and no car to drive in? And when he's surmounting debt because the Child Support Agency are billing him money his job can't support? Should he be punished for the unfortunate circumstances he got pushed into? His job isn't the easiest, he drives up and down the country with his team of co-workers providing a valuable service to communities everywhere, but the work isn't stable. He only gets called to work when it's available and can go for months without it. Now he's getting really broke, but he's trying his goddamned hardest to save up for a birthday present for his son. How dare you call these honest people lazy.

But maybe he could have gotten a better job if he tried harder? Think again. Raised in a socially and economically deprived area, this man didn't have the luxury of going to college or putting aside money for investment. He was straight out of school and straight to the chicken factory to help support his mother who had been made redundant. Taking jobs as and when they came, he eventually worked his way to where he is now through nothing but hard labour. If he was born in a moderately wealthy area, perhaps he'd have had a fighting chance at making something of himself.

I'm sorry to be like this, but what you're saying has hit too close to home. I have a lot of friends and family members who are honest, hard working people who by the foul luck of being born in these old mining suburbs, have had no real opportunities to make it big. They've worked damned hard to support themselves and I don't appreciate you sitting on your throne calling honest people "lazy" as if they CHOSE to be born here and have unfortunately poor families and be stuck in low paid jobs in which they work their asses off to support themselves and their loved ones. As I've said before in this thread, it's through my mothers blood, sweat and tears that I can even be here on this forum for hours out of the day. You'll have to tell me how "working oneself to the point of clinical depression" equates to "being lazy and not working for money".

And again, it's not as if my mother could have made anything of herself. She tried very hard in school and was offered a place in the sixth form. She had to turn it down. Her parents were out of work.

Have a little fucking respect. These people could just as easily quit their jobs and leech off the state. But they don't, they have a little more dignity than that, and the taxes from their hard-earned paychecks are what help keep your roads, railways, police force, fire brigade and (in the UK and other places) you're human right to health.

We're all trying here.

And don't come back with something to the effect of "well okay, I'll admit there are some HONEST poor people who really do try, but I was thinking about the GENUINELY lazy people who leech off the state and do no work and so choose to". Yeah, so lets punish the honest people some more.

On the other hand, I actually know a few families living off state benefits. Why do they do this? I'll ignore those who are genuinely disabled. There's one guy whose school career was destroyed when his father died. Another guy who had rough parents and ended up getting into drinking and drugs, but came clean and genuinely wanted to change his ways, but after months of job hunting he couldn't even get an interview and had to fall back to the state after his parents kicked him out of his house and had him living in a tent in a field which was burned down one night by youths. Then there are two families with widowed wives who had to quit their jobs to look after the kids now their father wasn't around. Heck, even my neighbour across the road is claiming benefits.

None of these people are lazy, nor are they leeches. They're genuine people in tough situations who need us to help get them back on their feet. And just when they need us the most, just when they're in the hospital waiting room awaiting much-needed treatment, you're going to tell them "too bad, you're a lazy ass. pay for it yourself. OH WAIT, you can't. OH WELL. Shoulda worked harder."

You make me sick. Even if there are a reasonable amount of genuinely, indebatably lazy leeches on the state, this doesn't mean we should punish the honest people for their misfortune. It'd be like punching every atheist in the face just because the Rational Response Squad were being unwarrantedly cruel towards their christian adversaries. I'm an atheist but I didn't do anything to deserve a punch. Catch my drift?

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK.

Well I'm glad that's over.

Did you miss the part where I said I had no insurance myself and that most of my adult life I've had no insurance or really crappy insurance? I'm NOT rich. My parents were poor. My parents were so poor I qualified for free meals at school. My parents refused to get food stamps or any state help because my father felt it was belittling. He fed me and my mom and put clothes on my back by working . I'm not some snobby rich person. I know what it's like to not have any money and I know what it's like to work for it. The issue is not free health care. NOTHING in life is free and if anyone is looking for anything for free it's a shame!!!! The government should be looking to make health care more affordable but a free health care takes money from those who have money and gives it to those who don't. As much as I hate to sound like a Republican....I have to agree with that concept. I'm not interested in a Robin Hood type mentality here.

For the record I voted for Obama and I like Obama. I liked the idea of him trying to fix the health care system that's broken. I'm not too happy with the way he's going with this though.

My taxes pay into parks department and I never care to use them. My taxes pay into the school system, I have no children and never intend to use them. My taxes pay into the highways of california, I never intend to use them.

YOU go ahead and pay extra out of your funds if you want to use these services and you can have your government parks and schools.

(The preceding was allegorical)