Four more years!

[Jason]

My end doesn't exactly just pull this sh*t out of our asses. Read Mises, Hayek, Friedman...lots of evidence.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

My end doesn't exactly just pull this sh*t out of our asses. Read Mises, Hayek, Friedman...lots of evidence.

I HAVE and I am still entitled to disagree with them or you guys.....

and there is always another side to whatever you read.

[hypehat]

To say that the opposition to myself, Fishmonk, Mike's Beard, and Bean Bag have provided "facts" would be giving the opposition WAY too much credit.

rockandroll cited the World Health Report. You cited a five year old news item somewhere from the bowels of the BBC and a five year old blog post. Are you serious?

[Mendota Heights]

My end doesn't exactly just pull this sh*t out of our asses. Read Mises, Hayek, Friedman...lots of evidence.

I HAVE and I am still entitled to disagree with them or you guys.....

and there is always another side to whatever you read.

Erik, what is your opinion on our current system? Central planning, our debt based monetary system, fractional reserve banking, the importance (?) of maintaining a currency's purchasing power, forced redistribution and so on...

Hypehat's free to answer too, since we seem to disagree on things.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Rocknroll: we're dealing with extremists here. Nothing wrong with that and I can fully respect it, but it makes attempts at discussion useless. You can find any amount of literature, philosophy or thought to suit whatever view you choose to take. It's easy. But that's missing the point of literature, philosophy or thought. Otherwise, each book ever written would be the last.....

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

My end doesn't exactly just pull this sh*t out of our asses. Read Mises, Hayek, Friedman...lots of evidence.

I HAVE and I am still entitled to disagree with them or you guys.....

and there is always another side to whatever you read.

Erik, what is your opinion on our current system? Central planning, our debt based monetary system, fractional reserve banking, the importance (?) of maintaining a currency's purchasing power, forced redistribution and so on...

Hypehat's free to answer too, since we seem to disagree on things.

I feel largely the same way you guys do: difference is, I disagree that the most unfortunate among us should have to suffer even more due to a faulty system of due to  individual's manhood issues.

[Mendota Heights]

It depends where you are. In every industrialized country, health care is considered a right and not a commodity. Because of course, it's not a commodity. And if it is, we should really privatize all sexual acts while we're at it.

It is true health care is considered a right in western countries, but that does not mean the government has to produce and distribute health care (like in Sweden). Think of this way: politicians say both health care and food are human rights. The Swedish state produces and distributes health care, but not food. We don't have any state employed farmers, but we have state employed doctors and nurses.

Why is that the case when both health care and food are claimed to be human rights?

The answer (I believe) is politicians know they are unable to effectively produce and distribute health care and food. When you call your local medical center in Sweden the first thing they do is convince you you do not need to see a nurse or a doctor (because they lack resources). Then if you need a hip surgery for example you have to wait for two long years. People accept that. People accept not receiving health care in time. What would happen if the state produced all food in a country, what would the people do if the state said "Do you really need food today?" or "You have to wait two years for food."? Nobody would accept that. People would riot and attack the state in a violent attempt to get rid of the politicians.

That is the main reason why states produce and distribute health care, but not food. They are incapable and they know it.

Food is produced and distributed in the private sector and there is an abundance of cheap and accessible food in every corner of every city or village. We can unfortunately not say the same thing about health care.

 

 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

It depends where you are. In every industrialized country, health care is considered a right and not a commodity. Because of course, it's not a commodity. And if it is, we should really privatize all sexual acts while we're at it.

It is true health care is considered a right in western countries, but that does not mean the government has to produce and distribute health care (like in Sweden). Think of this way: politicians say both health care and food are human rights. The Swedish state produces and distributes health care, but not food. We don't have any state employed farmers, but we have state employed doctors and nurses?

Why is that, both are claimed to be human rights?

The answer (I believe) is politicians know they are able to effectively produce and distribute neither health care nor food. When you call your local medical center in Sweden the first thing they do is to convince you you do not need to see a nurse or a doctor, because they are lacking resources. Then if you need a hip surgery for example you have to wait for two long years. People accept that. People accept not receiving health care in time. What would happen if the state produced all food in a country, what would the people do if the state said "Do you really need food today?" or "You have to wait two years for food."? Nobody would accept that. People would riot and attack the state in a violent attempt to get rid of the politicians.

That is the main reason why states produce and distribute health care, but not food. They are incapable of both and they know it.

Food is produced and distributed in the private sector and there is an abundance of cheep and accessible food in every corner of every city or village. We can unfortunately not say the same thing about healht care.

 

 

So, what is the answer? Or what can be done...... ASIDE from privatization across the board?  We've heard that argument.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I don't wanna beef with you, man, but accidents happen even with protection. If a woman does not want to be pregnant, that's all there is to it.

(As you all may have guessed, I am not sympathetic to the plight of the foetus...)

As you well know, I have a 5 year old daughter. My other two kids would be 8 and 7 if they had lived. That's why I feel the way I do.

[hypehat]

I don't wanna beef with you, man, but accidents happen even with protection. If a woman does not want to be pregnant, that's all there is to it.

(As you all may have guessed, I am not sympathetic to the plight of the foetus...)

As you well know, I have a 5 year old daughter. My other two kids would be 8 and 7 if they had lived. That's why I feel the way I do.

I didn't know that about the other two. I'm really sorry if I touched a nerve. Also caught your post upthread, damn. Be well, OK?

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I'm good.  And really, I may feel the way I do, but I am tolerant of others' beliefs.  I'm not like some people I know offline that cast aside friends who don't share their beliefs. I agree with bits and pieces of a lot of things I've read, but haven't contributed my two cents yet because 1) it'll be very long  and 2) I'm gonna rub some of you all the wrong way, as I'm very passionate about my beliefs and some of you all my look at me a bit 'differently', and I'm having too much of that offline to bring it online.

[Jason]

I'm good.  And really, I may feel the way I do, but I am tolerant of others' beliefs.  I'm not like some people I know offline that cast aside friends who don't share their beliefs. I agree with bits and pieces of a lot of things I've read, but haven't contributed my two cents yet because 1) it'll be very long  and 2) I'm gonna rub some of you all the wrong way, as I'm very passionate about my beliefs and some of you all my look at me a bit 'differently', and I'm having too much of that offline to bring it online.

I agree, except I'm not tolerant of others' beliefs if their beliefs resulted in actions that would deprive me of my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

[Mendota Heights]

It depends where you are. In every industrialized country, health care is considered a right and not a commodity. Because of course, it's not a commodity. And if it is, we should really privatize all sexual acts while we're at it.

It is true health care is considered a right in western countries, but that does not mean the government has to produce and distribute health care (like in Sweden). Think of this way: politicians say both health care and food are human rights. The Swedish state produces and distributes health care, but not food. We don't have any state employed farmers, but we have state employed doctors and nurses?

Why is that, both are claimed to be human rights?

The answer (I believe) is politicians know they are able to effectively produce and distribute neither health care nor food. When you call your local medical center in Sweden the first thing they do is to convince you you do not need to see a nurse or a doctor, because they are lacking resources. Then if you need a hip surgery for example you have to wait for two long years. People accept that. People accept not receiving health care in time. What would happen if the state produced all food in a country, what would the people do if the state said "Do you really need food today?" or "You have to wait two years for food."? Nobody would accept that. People would riot and attack the state in a violent attempt to get rid of the politicians.

That is the main reason why states produce and distribute health care, but not food. They are incapable of both and they know it.

Food is produced and distributed in the private sector and there is an abundance of cheep and accessible food in every corner of every city or village. We can unfortunately not say the same thing about healht care.

 

So, what is the answer? Or what can be done...... ASIDE from privatization across the board?  We've heard that argument.

I have more questions than answers. But I think history shows us the smaller the government the more (cheaper and better) goods and services in the economy. Goods and services which make our lives better. Especially the lives of poor people.

[Jason]

It depends where you are. In every industrialized country, health care is considered a right and not a commodity. Because of course, it's not a commodity. And if it is, we should really privatize all sexual acts while we're at it.

It is true health care is considered a right in western countries, but that does not mean the government has to produce and distribute health care (like in Sweden). Think of this way: politicians say both health care and food are human rights. The Swedish state produces and distributes health care, but not food. We don't have any state employed farmers, but we have state employed doctors and nurses?

Why is that, both are claimed to be human rights?

The answer (I believe) is politicians know they are able to effectively produce and distribute neither health care nor food. When you call your local medical center in Sweden the first thing they do is to convince you you do not need to see a nurse or a doctor, because they are lacking resources. Then if you need a hip surgery for example you have to wait for two long years. People accept that. People accept not receiving health care in time. What would happen if the state produced all food in a country, what would the people do if the state said "Do you really need food today?" or "You have to wait two years for food."? Nobody would accept that. People would riot and attack the state in a violent attempt to get rid of the politicians.

That is the main reason why states produce and distribute health care, but not food. They are incapable of both and they know it.

Food is produced and distributed in the private sector and there is an abundance of cheep and accessible food in every corner of every city or village. We can unfortunately not say the same thing about healht care.

 

So, what is the answer? Or what can be done...... ASIDE from privatization across the board?  We've heard that argument.

I have more questions than answers. But I think history shows us the smaller the government the more (cheaper and better) goods and services in the economy. Goods and services which make our lives better. Especially the lives of poor people.

Hence why Sweden has opened itself up to leagues of private investment in recent years. Sweden has done pretty well considering.

[Mendota Heights]

Hence why Sweden has opened itself up to leagues of private investment in recent years. Sweden has done pretty well considering.

Yeah, true. You are now able to choose your health care provider.

Health care is still heavily regulated, but it's a small step in the right direction though.

[hypehat]

I'm good.  And really, I may feel the way I do, but I am tolerant of others' beliefs.  I'm not like some people I know offline that cast aside friends who don't share their beliefs. I agree with bits and pieces of a lot of things I've read, but haven't contributed my two cents yet because 1) it'll be very long  and 2) I'm gonna rub some of you all the wrong way, as I'm very passionate about my beliefs and some of you all my look at me a bit 'differently', and I'm having too much of that offline to bring it online.

Man, we're all rubbing each other up the wrong way here so don't worry about that 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm good.  And really, I may feel the way I do, but I am tolerant of others' beliefs.  I'm not like some people I know offline that cast aside friends who don't share their beliefs. I agree with bits and pieces of a lot of things I've read, but haven't contributed my two cents yet because 1) it'll be very long  and 2) I'm gonna rub some of you all the wrong way, as I'm very passionate about my beliefs and some of you all my look at me a bit 'differently', and I'm having too much of that offline to bring it online.

Billy, we'll be looking at you with (Michale Edward size) Love no matter what your views are!

And I would apologize for my tirades but I'm pretty sure you all can handle it perfectly well and I know I'm a damn easy target myself...

[Jason]

If you go into a political discussion and don't expect some bile, you're kidding yourself. Although to be honest...the barbs here are pretty light. Go on a gun forum and tell them you love Obama! Then you'll really see some barbs (none that I agree with, though).

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

If there was a god, Bruce would be jumping in on these topics 

[Jason]

Historical Pistol-Whippin' Thug Life!

[SMiLE Brian]

Historical Pistol-Whippin' Thug Life!

Pacific Palisades Represent!

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It depends where you are. In every industrialized country, health care is considered a right and not a commodity. Because of course, it's not a commodity. And if it is, we should really privatize all sexual acts while we're at it.

It is true health care is considered a right in western countries, but that does not mean the government has to produce and distribute health care (like in Sweden). Think of this way: politicians say both health care and food are human rights. The Swedish state produces and distributes health care, but not food. We don't have any state employed farmers, but we have state employed doctors and nurses.

Why is that the case when both health care and food are claimed to be human rights?

My argument is not that health care should be subsidized because it's a human right. My argument is that the private market is historically disastrous and the public ends up paying for the repeated failures of an unregulated market anyhow - one pin in the haystack being the private health care system in the United States - so it only makes sense to remove the profit model.

The answer (I believe) is politicians know they are unable to effectively produce and distribute health care and food.

Since there is no historical basis for that, I find it difficult to believe.

When you call your local medical center in Sweden the first thing they do is convince you you do not need to see a nurse or a doctor (because they lack resources). Then if you need a hip surgery for example you have to wait for two long years. People accept that. People accept not receiving health care in time.

You can hear bad stories about any nation's health care but according to the research, Sweden has one of the best health care systems in the world for overall performance and is far more efficient than the US system where you not only pay more for health care than you do in Sweden but receive less quality, access, efficiency, equity, and less healthy lives. Cancer survival rates, infant mortality and life expectancy figures are better in Sweden than virtually anywhere else in Europe.

[Awesoman]

Dude, Eric Clapton went up on a stage and lectured a crowd in one of the most racially diverse cities in Britain about Enoch Powell and that they should 'Keep Britain White'. So, not racist.  

So you're going to base the man's entire life and career over some ill-choiced comments he made back in the 70's (also during a time he was into drugs and alcohol)?  One simple look at Clapton's career, the music he plays, his influences, the musicians he associates with, and the whole racist accusation simply does not hold a lot of weight.  

It makes you hate women because you're telling them that they can't get contraception. That's the implication when you say 'I'm pro-life'. It's no skin off your nose. You won't get pregnant. The implication that when a woman gets pregnant she is being 'irresponsible' for having sex, when of course being responsible would go hand in hand with easy contraceptive access and abortions and using those resources and being able to have a child when they want, is sexist and insulting.

I don't even know where to begin here.  You make a lot of ignorant, close-minded assumptions.  You're assuming that all pro-lifers are against contraception.  This is false (although contraceptives being included in health care is another story).  You also assume that pro-lifers are only placing blame on the female whom gets pregnant.  This is false and also ridiculous.  If I impregnate a woman, I am no less responsible for the baby than she is.  Finally, you make it sound like procreation is entirely a choice.  It's not.  Even when taking steps to avoid it (like wearing a condom), there is no guarantee that you wouldn't impregnate a female during intercourse.  Which is why a couple needs to take this possibility seriously.  And calling procreation "sexist" is laughable.  As I said before, if there was some magic switch that would only make babies when we wanted them, then all of this would be moot.

Not every pro-life person shares the same exact opinion over the matter and some people go way overboard in their beliefs, but ultimately the focus is on protecting the life of an unborn, not trying to deny women of anything.      

(As you all may have guessed, I am not sympathetic to the plight of the foetus...)

You do reallze that you were a foetus once, right?

Hype, being the adult you claim to be, it would be refreshing if you could be a little more open-minded here.  I may not agree with your political opinions, but I don't disrespect you for having them.  However, I do disrespect the childish way you convey them.  You seem to label anyone with a differing point of view as "hateful".  All you are demonstrating here is how insecure and close-minded you really are to people of differing opinions.  I do believe there are good and bad people on all sides of the political spectrum, and I try not to "villify" a point of view simply because I do not agree with it.  You should try that sometime.  :-)

[Mike's Beard]

In an ideal world I'd like to see an end to the NHS - which in theory should give us much lower tax rates,

No it wouldn't. The UK spends half as much on healthcare per person as the US.

I don't dispute that. That wasn't my point. My point was that with no NHS the people in the UK would not be taxed to the extent that they are. Where the US is failing is that too many healthcare insurance companies are more than willing to take your money but drag their heels when it comes to paying up. The best of both worlds would be private healthcare companies which operate under strict government guidelines to ensure that people don't get the shaft.

[Awesoman]

Rocknroll: we're dealing with extremists here. Nothing wrong with that and I can fully respect it, but it makes attempts at discussion useless. You can find any amount of literature, philosophy or thought to suit whatever view you choose to take. It's easy. But that's missing the point of literature, philosophy or thought. Otherwise, each book ever written would be the last.....

You're not dealing with extremists.  You're dealing with people with different viewpoints to your own.