Universal Healthcare

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, marge said:

My husband calls it socialism, which he thinks is way to close to communism.  But he does get a bit extra passionate about politics!

Smart man. 

Remember, nothing is "free" in life. And the stuff that is "free" is usually less than appealing.

[anatess2]

10 minutes ago, Tyme said:

Now you’re speaking my language.

 

Have you ever heard of the tiered theory of an economic system?

If you're talking about PROUT then yes, very familiar.  You  know what the problem with PROUT is?  The same problem as Socialism.  The requirement for Big Government.

[marge]

Just now, MormonGator said:

Smart man. 

Remember, nothing is "free" in life. And the stuff that is "free" is usually less than appealing.

So true, he would also add whatever 'bludgers who refuse to work are getting for free his tax dollars are paying for!'

 

[Tyme]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

If you're talking about PROUT then yes, very familiar.  You  know what the problem with PROUT is?  The same problem as Socialism.  The requirement for Big Government.

I’ve never heard of PROUT. I’ll have to read more about it.

Tiered is where there are different tiers of economic success. The first tier are those who don’t go to college or don’t work in an in demand field. They would still get a house, insurance, car, food and money for pleasures. As you go to school or work in an in demand field you go up tiers. The higher the tier the better stuff you get. It can be referred to as tiered communism. I just hate to say communism because it has so many negative connotations. The political system would be democracy.

you can call it tymeism for short lol

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Tyme said:

 The political system would be democracy.

I hope you know the difference between a republic and a democracy and why a democracy is bad.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Guest

[Tyme]

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

I hope you know the difference between a republic and a democracy and why a democracy is bad.

Your attitude is off putting that’s why I don’t respond to you in regards to politics. 

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, marge said:

My husband calls it socialism, which he thinks is way to close to communism.

Truly, the only difference between socialism and communism is semantics.

The original meaning of "communism" (before Marx ran with it) was a simple life where there was no government.  Everyone simply worked togethe in a guess what?  A "Commune".  That commune would be large or small.  But it had to be big enough to offer security and basic necessities for all.  This isn't actually corrupt.  It is highly inefficient and has a lot of weaknesses.

After Marx got a hold of it, it became totalitarian socialism.  There really isn't a definitional difference.  It is merely the end result of any socialist state that continues in socialism.

Socialism is simply the public ownership and operation of a non public good.  Public goods are things like police and military.  Non-public goods are food, clothing, and shelter.  On the surface, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it.  But once you change "public" to "government" that invites the use of force in the application of the system.  That's where the problem lies.

When I earn the money for my entire family, I do so because that's what fathers do.  My wife and children benefit form the labor of my hand and my mind.  They didn't earn it.  But they're not stealing it because I give it to them.  There is no force.  It is voluntary.  No evil. No corruption.

When government steps in to take things over, they FORCE people to participate.  Obamacare, for instance said that if you don't buy insurance that has the conditions that they specified, then you'd be assessed a tax penalty (similar to the Medicare system in Australia).  If you decide not to pay it, they will forcibly take if from you.  They may imprison you at the point of a gun.  But they usually just ruin your finances sufficiently that you just don't want to mess with them.  In any other circumstance, this type of tactic would be called theft.

The corrupt part of it is that the very basis is that person A has the right to demand person B's stuff if Person A shows he needs/wants it badly enough.  That is theft.

When the very basis of an economic system is based on theft, how on earth do you have an economy based on honor?

People who decry socialism usually say things like "It just doesn't work." or sometimes "it's inefficient".  Those may or may not be true depending on a dozen factors.  But what is always true is that if you start with the assumption that you can take the lawful property of one person and give it to another person without any due process to warrant such, then you've got a corrupt system.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Guest

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Tyme said:

Your attitude is off putting that’s why I don’t respond to you in regards to politics. 

Ok. Fair enough.  Let's see what we can do about that.

I'll air out my issue with your attitude.  This will be my last "rant".  The purpose is so we can really air it out.  Then we can try to find the "friend zone".  Does that work for you?

[askandanswer]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

But what is always true is that if you start with the assumption that you can take the lawful property of one person and give it to another person without any due process to warrant such, then you've got a corrupt system.

This is not a critical question, but just motivated by curiosity. Would the careful consideration by parliamentarians and Congressmen, and the opportunities for the public to provide input into the legislative process count as due process?

[anatess2]

49 minutes ago, Tyme said:

I’ve never heard of PROUT. I’ll have to read more about it.

Tiered is where there are different tiers of economic success. The first tier are those who don’t go to college or don’t work in an in demand field. They would still get a house, insurance, car, food and money for pleasures. As you go to school or work in an in demand field you go up tiers. The higher the tier the better stuff you get. It can be referred to as tiered communism. I just hate to say communism because it has so many negative connotations. The political system would be democracy.

you can call it tymeism for short lol

There’s a reason for those negative connotations.

And a Democracy is not a good thing which is the pitfalls of the economic system you describe... the only way you can get that to work is for a government to decide what the tiers are gonna be (hence the communism part) subject to Mob Rule (the democracy part).

[askandanswer]

If I call 13 74 25 after hours, eventually (it could be up to 2 hours) a doctor will come to my home and conduct a consultation and perhaps even make a diagnosis and issue a prescription. This is a national service, available to pretty much anybody. I won't pay anything directly for this service, although eventually I pay for it through the medicare levy. It's one of the methods the government has devised to reduce the number of people going to the emergency ward of the local hospital for things that are not really emergencies, which is a much more expensive way of treating a problem than a home visit by a doctor. How much would a home visit by a doctor cost in your part of the world?      

[anatess2]

8 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

This is not a critical question, but just motivated by curiosity. Would the careful consideration by parliamentarians and Congressmen, and the opportunities for the public to provide input into the legislative process count as due process?

Due process is defined by Law.  So, before due process can occur, the process must first be defined by legislation.

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

6 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

If I call 13 74 25 after hours, eventually (it could be up to 2 hours) a doctor will come to my home and conduct a consultation and perhaps even make a diagnosis and issue a prescription. This is a national service, available to pretty much anybody. I won't pay anything directly for this service, although eventually I pay for it through the medicare levy. It's one of the methods the government has devised to reduce the number of people going to the emergency ward of the local hospital for things that are not really emergencies, which is a much more expensive way of treating a problem than a home visit by a doctor. How much would a home visit by a doctor cost in your part of the world?      

In the US, depends on your insurance.

In the Philippines, depends on your relationship with the doctor.  If the doctor is my brother he better charge me $0 or I’m siccing my mom on him.  He’ll take bananas or chickens, etc for people from his hometown. 😀

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[Tyme]

5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

There’s a reason for those negative connotations.

And a Democracy is not a good thing which is the pitfalls of the economic system you describe... the only way you can get that to work is for a government to decide what the tiers are gonna be (hence the communism part) subject to Mob Rule (the democracy part).

What is the name most people use for the US political system?

The only slight difference is that there would be national proposals. Similar to how the states do them now.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

This is not a critical question, but just motivated by curiosity. Would the careful consideration by parliamentarians and Congressmen, and the opportunities for the public to provide input into the legislative process count as due process?

No.  Due process in the context in which I used it is by definition a case-by-case basis.  The understanding being that if a person is accused of a crime, then they may legally and morally be assessed a fine or be deprived of property.  Without the presence of a crime, the deprivation of property is simply theft.  And that is what most taxation nowadays amounts to.

The basic principle is this: if I own something then what right does anyone (even government) have to simply take it because THEY deem it necessary?  There have no right. (notice the period)

People have to accept the notion that there are public goods and private goods.  And some libertarians say there are NO public goods.  I disagree.  Why even have a government then?  You can't really.  But once you define public goods and private goods properly, then you can determine when the government is morally owed some of your money and when it is not.

Go away from that instinctive moral code that everyone understands from birth, then you have some problems in society concerning honesty and theft.

[Tyme]

26 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Ok. Fair enough.  Let's see what we can do about that.

I'll air out my issue with your attitude.  This will be my last "rant".  The purpose is so we can really air it out.  Then we can try to find the "friend zone".  Does that work for you?

How about this... want to set up a debate for Monday? The reason I say Mon is because I’ll have internet hooked up by then. I will be able to use my computer instead of my phone.

Topic: Universal Healthcare

Format: opening statements, two rebuttals and closing statements. The posts can be as long or as short as we do choose. Then when done we can set up a poll for the audience to decide the winner.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Tyme said:

How about this... want to set up a debate for Monday? The reason I say Mon is because I’ll have internet hooked up by then. I will be able to use my computer instead of my phone.

Topic: Universal Healthcare

Format: opening statements, two rebuttals and closing statements. The posts can be as long or as short as we do choose. Then when done we can set up a poll for the audience to decide the winner.

Well, that's fine.  But the point of my last post (and I thought yours as well) was that we seem to be seeing an attitude problem on the other side.  I wanted to just air those out and see if we can have a truce.  Without that, any further debates will simply devolve into a slug fest.

As part of my background, I actually can have a good relationship with someone with whom I disagree politically.  One guy is an anti-Mormon who left the Church like 10 years ago.  And he is TOTALLY liberal.  But we can still be friends because we know how to talk to each other on the subject of politics.  And it isn't just to avoid the topic. 

I tend to think you're an ok guy.  It's just a lot of the political stuff you're saying that I have a problem with.  So, I'd like to explain to you what I do with my friend so that you and I can follow the same rules.  That is in the hopes that I'll stop doing what bugs you and you'll stop doing what bugs me.

But if you don't want to do that, then I understand.  Just recognize the fact that when I read something completely off base I'm going to say something about it.

[Tyme]

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

Well, that's fine.  But the point of my last post (and I thought yours as well) was that we seem to be seeing an attitude problem on the other side.  I wanted to just air those out and see if we can have a truce.  Without that, any further debates will simply devolve into a slug fest.

As part of my background, I actually can have a good relationship with someone with whom I disagree politically.  One guy is an anti-Mormon who left the Church like 10 years ago.  And he is TOTALLY liberal.  But we can still be friends because we know how to talk to each other on the subject of politics.  And it isn't just to avoid the topic. 

I tend to think you're an ok guy.  It's just a lot of the political stuff you're saying that I have a problem with.  So, I'd like to explain to you what I do with my friend so that you and I can follow the same rules.  That is in the hopes that I'll stop doing what bugs you and you'll stop doing what bugs me.

But if you don't want to do that, then I understand.  Just recognize the fact that when I read something completely off base I'm going to say something about it.

So do you want to have a debate or no?

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Tyme said:

So do you want to have a debate or no?

It depends on what rules we're to have it under.  If it is simply going to be the same as we've already had, I don't see the point.  But if we can adopt the behaviors that my other friend and I have used, then it may be a profitable pursuit.

In case you're wondering:  You've outlined a standard format.  But that isn't the same as the rules.  If you're not interested, then you're not interested.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Guest

[Tyme]

I’ll let you pick the rules. How nice am I? You get to pick the rules and have biased voters.

[askandanswer]

16 hours ago, askandanswer said:

This is slightly off topic, but a few months back, after many many years of protest, the Australian government finally removed the General Sales Tax on tampons.

And in breaking news, announced just today, in the Victorian state election campaign.............

 

Labor pledges free tampons and pads in Victoria's public schools

Girls will receive free tampons and pads at Victorian state schools if Labor is re-elected, premier Daniel Andrews has pledged.

In an announcement on Twitter on Thursday morning, he said" "It’s an Australian first. It’s the right thing to do."

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/labor-pledges-free-tampons-and-pads-in-victoria-s-public-schools-20181115-p50g7d.html

[jerome1232]

I would be open to two-tier type of system somewhat like Germany. But I'm mostly an idiot about these things, from what I've read of their system it seems like it strikes a good balance.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, jerome1232 said:

I would be open to two-tier type of system somewhat like Germany. But I'm mostly an idiot about these things, from what I've read of their system it seems like it strikes a good balance.

Once upon a time, it was.  But as all socialist systems, give it time and it will wear down the economy because you just can't give that much stuff out for free.  Germany has been conscious of the financial effects of their healthcare system for at least a decade.  But they simply keep plugging along because they don't see a way out of it.

They've taken to raising co-pays and deductibles.  They will continue to get higher.  But in about 25 years, they'll start noticing that their government will be nearly all Muslim run.  Sharia law will take over and bye-bye to their socialized medicine.  So, the Muslims will save the German economy.  All hail Islam for saving a nation's economy.

Edited November 15, 2018 by Guest

[anatess2]

15 hours ago, Tyme said:

What is the name most people use for the US political system?

The only slight difference is that there would be national proposals. Similar to how the states do them now.

The US Political System is a Republic.

The problem with the US economy as "how the states do them now" is these "national proposals" are run by lobbyists to which government depends on to run their elections.  If you've ever wondered why Comcast can survive a free-market economy with the abysmal level of customer service they provide... it's because Comcast has your city council in its backpocket to edge out competition.

Your described tiered economic proposal is basically taking the current problem and making it the standard operating procedure.

Edited November 15, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

4 hours ago, askandanswer said:

And in breaking news, announced just today, in the Victorian state election campaign.............

 

Labor pledges free tampons and pads in Victoria's public schools

Girls will receive free tampons and pads at Victorian state schools if Labor is re-elected, premier Daniel Andrews has pledged.

In an announcement on Twitter on Thursday morning, he said" "It’s an Australian first. It’s the right thing to do."

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/labor-pledges-free-tampons-and-pads-in-victoria-s-public-schools-20181115-p50g7d.html

Oh yeay... 

At least Filipinos are honest about their vote-buying... stapling 200 pesos on a pre-filled ballot.