American Doom!

Originally posted by civilchallenger
Your whole philosophy is based on the idea that human beings are uncivilized brutes who can not be trusted to be generous and help each other out. My philosophy is based on the idea that humans learn to support each other without being forced to do so by the government.

Yeah right. Your "philosophy" means no interstate highways, no money for research and education and let's just go back to stone age. And, by the way, emergency room is not really healthcare, it's mitigating an emergency.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
reply to post by inforeal

 

Well you are right about one thing. The Tea Party as it stands now is infiltrated by Neocon's that have a new message to spin.

As is the Democrat Party infiltrated with Socialist Progressives.
There are always two sides to every argument.

I do however love your signature quote, read it again and walk the talk.

Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by amc621

 

The democratic congress just tried to do that but the republicans blocked it

mystateline.com...

www.washingtonpost.com...

www.rawstory.com...

******
Seriously, they're all the same and have tricked YOU and others into thinking they're not. It's called divide and conquer, it's been going on since day one. It's the left/right paradigm it's the plan. Instead of working together they divide and promote hostility amongst the people which in turn creates the perfect distraction for their illegal activities. Think about it.

Originally posted by GlennCanady
This post shows that many out there still do not understand that Obama serves the satanic new world order just like Bushy did.

Go listen to the Alex Jones show and get educated about the new world order. The new world order controls the top levels of both parties and have supported the private bank Federal Reserve. That's why the ONLY President since 1913 to oppose the Federal Reserve and try to abolish it was JFK and they killed him for it. You have been brainwashed by the left - right paradigm to think the "left" is your daddy who will give you all the "free goodies".

The Tea Party is against the large government of both Bush and Obama. Both these men were frauds and puppets of the new world order that were for WAR, TORTURE and government interference in your life.

It's time to grow up and go learn about the satanic new world order and their plans for a one world government. The government is not part of the problem, it IS the problem.

*****************
Thank God (your choice here) someone GET'S it!!!!

Originally posted by defcon5

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by KingKickass123
Most people have insurance from their employers that provides fine healthcare. Others use the Medicare/Medicaid system, which gets you in to see most of the same Doctors as any other regular insurance company.


I have many relatives that live in Canada and also a cousin who married a Canadian and holds dual citizenship. We've had many conversations on their health care system and for the most part they're completely happy with their health care system. They complain their are a lot of false hoods that American politicians say about their health care system. They can call and set an appointment with a doctor within a week. My personal experience with doctors, if I want an appointment with my doctor I sometimes can't get in for a couple of months! I recently tried to get an appointment for my son to see a skin doctor and the earliest I can get him in is January! My cousin who lives in Canada says the system is great. He acknowledges that their are some bad doctors in the system but we have some bad doctors down here. There's a saying that goes "don't believe everything you hear and half of what you see". In this case I believe my relatives. They have no reason to lie. Our system is doctored by insurance companies.

Medicare is a government program which conservatives praise.

I don't agree that most people in this country have health care provided by their employer. I worked full-time for 3 years as a temporary full time employee with no benefits what-so-ever! Companies have loopholes to avoid paying for health care benefits. I was working a 40 hour week like everyone else and I was the lead designer in my department!! I was 27 married and had a child. I eventually left and went into business for myself. So I would say considering what people hear is not always based on fact. How many Americans have left the United States to have surgery outside of this country because our insurance system didn't cover the procedure? When insurance companies can tell you or your doctor what procedures you can have, than that system is denying your right to choose all options available to cure your condition.

Their are some truths to the Ops rant, but I'm not sold that either party has the average worker's best interest in mind. Instead of coming down on this guy's thread, lets be honest with ourselves and identify the good points of either party (if there is any).

extra DIV

Some of you people who are too young don’t know that the South use to be democratic. . . . Until Lyndon Johnson passed civil right acts in the 60’s. You know things like letting black people have equal access to housing, education, water fountains, and things like that. GUESS WHAT HAPPENED?

On education:

On May 17, 1954, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision regarding the case called Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, in which the plaintiffs charged that the education of black children in separate public schools from their white counterparts was unconstitutional. The opinion of the Court stated that the "segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law; for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group."

Who was the President on May 17th, 1954? Dwight D. Eisenhower, Republican.

Of course, who can forget the little incident in Arkansas, when the Governor of Arkansas used Arkansas National Guard to stop black children from integrating Arkansas schools?

Democrat Orval Eugene Faubus (January 7, 1910 – December 14, 1994) was the 36th Governor of Arkansas, serving from 1955 to 1967.

How did that end?

In October 1957 Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and ordered them to return to their armories which effectively removed them from Faubus' control.

Eisenhower then sent elements of the 101st Airborne Division to Arkansas to protect the black students and enforce the Federal court order. In retaliation, Faubus shut down Little Rock high schools for the 1958–1959 school year.

Even though the Republicans and Tea Party trounced the Democrats (or was that "shellacked"?)

I still felt the need to point out your misgivings on history.

I am sorry to inform you but this is just plain old fear mongering. I don't even see a conspiracy here, just a total load of garbage.!

reply to post by lucid eyes


I can see by the tone of your typing you truly believe what you wrote. So sad, What books do you read????? :-)

Originally posted by civilchallenger
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I know what being civilized is, and I know you are not a civilized person. Civilized people do not take other's property without permission .That is stealing and it is wrong. Learn more about moral values. Your whole philosophy is based on the idea that human beings are uncivilized brutes who can not be trusted to be generous and help each other out. My philosophy is based on the idea that humans learn to support each other without being forced to do so by the government. You wish to come into my house and steal and you think you are generous. So you stay in Canada and I'll stay here where people mind their business and behave more civilized.

Don't do it bro.

You can't win an argument with the afflicted. He thinks roads can only created by government via the use of force.

By the time a person has not only convinced themself of such things but goes out of their way to support it, they are beyond help.

*Just keep asking him questions and force him to dodge and squirm in front of everyone.

reply to post by inforeal


GREAT POST !!!!
For a moment, I thought I was one of the few who actually got this !
Now I don't feel so alone !
Thanks for the post !
And for those of you who voted republican and are not super rich or a mega-corporation....WTF were you thinking !!!!!!???!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
reply to post by inforeal

 

Since you obviously hate the party which is about to run the show, I have a proposal for you:

I will personally finance your relocation to any other country on the planet. You can go live in whatever socialist utopia you deem fit. Venezuela perhaps?

The only condition is this: You can never again step foot in the United States.

Ever.

So how about it? An all expenses paid one way trip to wherever the hell you want to go.

When would you like to leave?

Is that offer just for the OP or for anybody?

Originally posted by Shminkee Pinkee
I can see by the tone of your typing you truly believe what you wrote. , What books do you read????? :-)

No books needed. Its enough to look at the borderline mentally ill posting around here.

These total-doom threads go back ten years. Check it out. Total doom is imminent! George Bush will declare martial law...oh wait a minute...Bush is no longer in office is he...oh well...then lets replace the name with someone elses.

So sad

Want me to get out the violin?

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by sdcigarpig

 

All civilized countries in the world have national health care. It isn’t perfect BUT PEOPLE IN THOSE COUNTRIES DON’T DIE IN THE STREET!

This is wrong. Taking without permission is uncivilized. National Health Care requires property theft. Therefore, all civilized countries do *not* have any nationalized health care. Any country that has nationalized health care is uncivilized.

No, we have to choose between TWO evils: Moderate property theft used to pay national healthcare, or letting poor people health deteriorate because of easily curable conditions, leading (in addition to humanitarian issues) fo FURTHER economic damage due to increased emergency costs and decreased productivity of such people - which is in effect, is property theft too (makes the whole society poorer that it potentially have to be).

Obviously in the long run, the former is less evil, from both humanitarian AND economic standpoint. Thats what some people dont understand - money spent on efficient national healthcare are NOT flushed down the toilet. They are spend to INCREASE health and therefore ECONOMIC productivity of masses, making EVERYONE richer than in country without public health care in the long run.

Okay, I read the original posting, then actually read all the follow up posts as a well,
the original is an opinion leaking emotion all over the page,
the collective, including mine, is another waste of space and bandwidth, nothing resolved,
and that dear atser's is how washington likes it, chaotic and swirling arguing with eachother unfocused on what's really going on, allowing tptb to continue to do what they want.
Left=Right=Expect more of the same.

Originally posted by Maslo

No, we have to choose between TWO evils:

I won't ever simply pick the lesser of two evils concerning something so important, and we do have a choice (to a degree). That's part of the reason I voted Libertarian where I could. If both major parties have the essence of being evil in the eyes of so many people, than something must be amiss and I will have no part of it.

Moderate property theft used to pay national healthcare, or letting poor people health deteriorate because of easily curable conditions, leading (in addition to humanitarian issues) fo FURTHER economic damage due to increased emergency costs and decreased productivity of such people - which is in effect, is property theft too (makes the whole society poorer that it potentially have to be).

Obviously in the long run, the former is less evil, from both humanitarian AND economic standpoint. Thats what some people dont understand - money spent on efficient national healthcare are NOT flushed down the toilet. They are spend to INCREASE health and therefore ECONOMIC productivity of masses, making EVERYONE richer than in country without public health care in the long run.

I went ahead and highlighted the one word that makes a big difference in your above post. EFFICIENT. The government has already shown time and time again that they fail miserably at handling stuff like this. I am by no means saying our system was good the way it was. I complain about it's many failings all the time. Honestly, I don't know how to fix it. Having the government steal my property though for healthcare, and especially healthcare that would fund things like the murder of innocent infants, is something that I for one simply cannot stand for. I will always vote on moral and principle. Again part of the reason I voted Libertarian, as I see many of the wars we have entered into as immoral and unjustifiable.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by civilchallenger
Your whole philosophy is based on the idea that human beings are uncivilized brutes who can not be trusted to be generous and help each other out. My philosophy is based on the idea that humans learn to support each other without being forced to do so by the government.

Yeah right. Your "philosophy" means no interstate highways, no money for research and education and let's just go back to stone age. And, by the way, emergency room is not really healthcare, it's mitigating an emergency.

This is correct. Before government formed, people chose not to learn, not to build roads, and not to research any technologies. Only after the government came along did all this happen. I know this because the government told me so.

The more government spending their is, the faster people can move from point A to point B. Why only tomorrow I'm going to fly my first flying car because Government Motors(GM) is going to start selling to me for a low price due to high government efficiency in the transportation sector. I'm so glad you pointed out roads, because they take up a whopping 0.5% of government spending. Clearly there is so much feverish support of theft, the lesser evil, and such little support for roads, that people could not manage to keep 0.5% of the budget to pay for the roads on a voluntary basis.

The more money government puts into education, the smarter we become. Thats why Americans, who spend the most on education, are by far in first place and the smartest people in the world. Ever been to New Jersey? Their motto is now "The Genius State". In fact, in 1910 Americans spent about 2% of their money on education. Now that figure is closer to 10% and its all because of the government. If the government stop stealing from me, I'd have no way of ever bringing my education spending down to the 1910 levels when a greater percentage of Americans could read and write.

All praise the government. My government the most sacred religion in existence and I don't need evidence to vouch for it but only passing cryptic comments about roads and schools to form the basis for my entire government religion and way of life. All that despite that literacy rates have declined since the expansion of government schools and that roadways take up a tiny 0.5% of the government budget. Above we must never need to even try any other way as no other way but stealing other people's property could possibly work because I said so and the government said so.

And you are also right about people becoming rich because of the government. Its not motors, engines, air conditioners, and transistors that caused a great increase in wealth over the past 100 years. It was the gubbermint. So now we can make taxes voluntary as we'll all give all our money to the government so we can live even better!

reply to post by Mykahel

I won't ever simply pick the lesser of two evils concerning something so important, and we do have a choice (to a degree). That's part of the reason I voted Libertarian where I could. If both major parties have the essence of being evil in the eyes of so many people, than something must be amiss and I will have no part of it.

I dont think there is a third option - either do not have public healthcare and treat only emergencies if uninsured with commercial company, or have some form of it.

I went ahead and highlighted the one word that makes a big difference in your above post. EFFICIENT. The government has already shown time and time again that they fail miserably at handling stuff like this.

There are many countries and majority have some form of public healthcare system, which is efficient at least enough to justify having public healthcare instead of not having it. Many governments are corrupt and incompetent to a degree, but I have never heard someone saying it would be better if there was no public healthcare because of that, instead, its always one of the better things the government has done. Is US government really that incompetent that it would be unable to do something that majority of western governments, even corrupt ones, have done with good results for almost a century?

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by civilchallenger

Originally posted by inforeal
reply to post by sdcigarpig

 

All civilized countries in the world have national health care. It isn’t perfect BUT PEOPLE IN THOSE COUNTRIES DON’T DIE IN THE STREET!

This is wrong. Taking without permission is uncivilized. National Health Care requires property theft. Therefore, all civilized countries do *not* have any nationalized health care. Any country that has nationalized health care is uncivilized.

No, we have to choose between TWO evils: Moderate property theft used to pay national healthcare, or letting poor people health deteriorate because of easily curable conditions.

No, we have to choose between good and evil. The first option is to steal people's money to pay for national health care. The second option is to voluntarily help out those who are having health care problems without being forced to. You ASSUME people never would give money to charity without being forced to, but the assumption is both offensive and wrong.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Mykahel

 

Is US government really that incompetent that it would be unable to do something that majority of western governments, even corrupt ones, have done with good results for almost a century?

Possibly, but I do not know if it is the result of incompetence. That may be putting them in too good a light. What if the government, in its insatiable thirst for power, actually wants to control who lives and who dies via health care. What if it becomes the government that is doing ALL of the medical experiments for new procedures and medicines. Are we going to become their expendable lab projects? I'm taking it to an extreme here, but I view the government in the US, as it is now, as being much more sinister than it is incompetent.

A scene from the movie Troy comes to mind here. If the government was simply doing so poorly because they were that ignorant, I could possibly forgive them. As it is though I believe they know very well what they are doing and therefor I view them as sinister and, to put it bluntly, evil. I have yet to decide what the appropriate response to such a government is. It seems that voting can only do so much, as the men and women we even get to vote for seem to be less than desirable more often than not.

Sorry for rambling a bit there.

Originally posted by civilchallenger
I'm so glad you pointed out roads, because they take up a whopping 0.5% of government spending.

Fine, so now you started to bargain. You seem to be OK with 0.5% "theft" -- right? What about funding of research? How much do you think is right?

Clearly there is so much feverish support of theft, the lesser evil, and such little support for roads, that people could not manage to keep 0.5% of the budget to pay for the roads on a voluntary basis.

Looking at penny-pinchers like you, I have no trust at "voluntary support" of infrastructure projects of any sort. Theoretically, instead of war in Iraq, we could have built a maglev train line from NYC to LA, but you would say "over my dead cold body". Let's go back to the caves.

The more money government puts into education, the smarter we become.

We don't. Family is a huge factor here. However I observe that the Europeans and other nations are apparently more efficient in spending these funds and college education is basically free.

All praise the government.

Damn the government, just like damn my heart medication. But without governance let's just forget about progress. Asia is surging forward ahead of us exactly because of solid governance of the economy. There are trains in China that travel at 435 km/h, do you know of any such line in the US?

And you are also right about people becoming rich because of the government. Its not motors, engines, air conditioners, and transistors that caused a great increase in wealth over the past 100 years. It was the gubbermint.

This time you nailed it! You see, the Internet you are now use to post that rubbish of yours is an off-spin of one of the DARPA projects, fully funded by the money "stolen" from your parents. Computer science became what it is now in a large part due to defense research, again funded by expropriated monies. Interstate when it was built was a huge expense and again the money had been stolen. Velcro was developed inside the Moon landing program (again, those thieves...).