Universal Healthcare page 8

I find it terribly amusing when someone comes out with the “America; Love it or leave it!” nonsense.
By that logic, there should have been a mass exodus of middle-aged white men for libertarian paradises like Somalia during the last four years.
Nope, all still here, all still falsely attributing the current government with socialist ideals, all still advocating for policies that help no one except the very rich, all still willfully ignorant of the facts involved in issues like the health care debate.

Honestly, it makes me chuckle.

Originally posted by scoopolard:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
Don’t generalize about us.

Sigh the book actually claims that non-religous conservatives are the least charitable. With the real question(according to the book) actually not being are you conservative or liberal but are you religious. Conservatives thus only average higher because there are is a higher percentage of religious people under the conservatives than under the liberals.

But there is an even bigger Problem with the above, because of the word charity. Which per definition includes generally all money and time donated to religious institutes and their afflicted clubs and businesses. No matter if the activity is actually aimed at helping “its weakest members” as you call it. If you classify similar activities of people in non-religious institutes, clubs and businesses as charity(which are normally not considered charity) the differences cease to exist so far that they become indistinguishable.

now, you are saying we should socialise health care but make it state run.

No.

also i don’t like the US’s state devisions, because they are drawn with a measure lint accross a map. the borders make no sense whatsoever from neither a geographic nor a culturologic perspective. hence why it’s very difficult for people to identify with their state, instead rediculously identifying with what is almost an entire continent.

borders are suposed to follow rivers and mountain lines (and such natural boundaries) and group people based on shared cultural, historical connections. state borders don’t do that.

Neither do many of Africa’s borders, or the border between the US and Canada, or maybe the feistiest measured line across a map, the one between N. and S. Korea.

also “federalism” implies the member states are subservient to the collective government.

I’m well aware of it. If it didn’t there wouldn’t be a US government, but the US would be more like Europe in that it would be a collection of a large number of sovereign entities. But, if the feds stop doing top-down regulation (such as eliminating the Dept. of Education), then the federalism applies to each state being able to take care of their own business.

There is a tremendous usage of this “top-down-programs”, issen. The money American citizens pay in Federal Taxes is returned to the States in what is called block grants Like the National govt or not…this method of dispersal of funds is very common in many facets….even the work force. A company makes money, it pays its employees (largely based on their productivity), those employees disperse that money in areas they deem to be appropriate for their needs.

This “top-down-management”—while it most certainly DOES HAVE its "problems (some of them big &/or dumb)—still is, at this time, the “best” way to manage a huge process called the American society.& be somewhat “fair” about it.

1) I’m a poli-sci major, I don’t need a civics lesson from you about what block grants are. Block grants should be used over categorical grants because it gives more leeway to the states in how they want to apply the funds.

2) I challenge you Karma to produce a federal program that is more efficient issued top-down with no discretion for the states vs. giving the power to the states. My reasoning that this doesn’t work can be explained in something from W’s glorious reign: NCLB – just a terrible piece of legislation that tries to make each school district uniform when that is simply an impossibility. Schools in Illinois and Alabama have vastly different children and need vastly different education systems.

Originally posted by scoopolard

Oh Karma, you never cease to amaze me. If there was one person on this forum to subscribe to the ridiculousness that is Knife’s ideology, it’d be you. Ah well.

You are ridiculous Scooplard, not me.

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

So I’m telling him to LEAVE.

I have to admit, your country will certainly be the greatest in the world for all Americans if all those who don’t agree should leave.

Sure. Just make it out however you want.

Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

Originally posted by scoopolard

Oh Karma, you never cease to amaze me. If there was one person on this forum to subscribe to the ridiculousness that is Knife’s ideology, it’d be you. Ah well.

You are ridiculous Scooplard, not me.

Can you try responding and actually DEFENDING your ideology? The only people I ever encounter with your line of thought are on the internet.

Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Originally posted by scoopolard:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
Don’t generalize about us.

Sigh the book actually claims that non-religous conservatives are the least charitable. With the real question(according to the book) actually not being are you conservative or liberal but are you religious. Conservatives thus only average higher because there are is a higher percentage of religious people under the conservatives than under the liberals.

But there is an even bigger Problem with the above, because of the word charity. Which per definition includes generally all money and time donated to religious institutes and their afflicted clubs and businesses. No matter if the activity is actually aimed at helping “its weakest members” as you call it. If you classify similar activities of people in non-religious institutes, clubs and businesses as charity(which are normally not considered charity) the differences cease to exist so far that they become indistinguishable.

The book also states that, even without religious donations included, conservatives still donate more money on average to charity.

Originally posted by softest_voice:

I find it terribly amusing when someone comes out with the “America; Love it or leave it!” nonsense.
By that logic, there should have been a mass exodus of middle-aged white men for libertarian paradises like Somalia during the last four years.
Nope, all still here, all still falsely attributing the current government with socialist ideals, all still advocating for policies that help no one except the very rich, all still willfully ignorant of the facts involved in issues like the health care debate.

Honestly, it makes me chuckle.

No, because that also implies that they all dislike it here. I’m not saying love it or leave it. I’m just saying don’t hate it or dislike it and stay. That makes no logical sense.

Originally posted by scoopolard:

Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Originally posted by scoopolard:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
Don’t generalize about us.

Sigh the book actually claims that non-religous conservatives are the least charitable. With the real question(according to the book) actually not being are you conservative or liberal but are you religious. Conservatives thus only average higher because there are is a higher percentage of religious people under the conservatives than under the liberals.

But there is an even bigger Problem with the above, because of the word charity. Which per definition includes generally all money and time donated to religious institutes and their afflicted clubs and businesses. No matter if the activity is actually aimed at helping “its weakest members” as you call it. If you classify similar activities of people in non-religious institutes, clubs and businesses as charity(which are normally not considered charity) the differences cease to exist so far that they become indistinguishable.

The book also states that, even without religious donations included, conservatives still donate more money on average to charity.

Could you provide some proof for this statement. Could not find it in your link. I would especially like to know what data that claim is supposed to be based on. From experience i rather doubt the availability of such data since keeping religious donations and secular donations apart seems near impossible. Or wait do you only mean expressively religious donations to churches and not donations to any affiliated clubs and businesses or donations that are not expressively “religious”.
The thing is that many clubs that have an religious affiliation commonly are considered charities and get such status which other secular clubs of the same type neither get nor regularly apply for. Since such affiliated clubs usually get their members through the religious social network they are affiliated with, religious people then show up in some data sources to be more charitable.

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

Nowhere in the Bible does it say I should have to pay for other people to go see a doctor.

Originally posted by CROWlingInMySkin:

Nowhere in the Bible does it say I should have to pay for other people to go see a doctor.

The Bible also doesn’t say anything about being a crow, or trolling on the Internet.

Wut do?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

Originally posted by scoopolard:

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

So I’m telling him to LEAVE.

I have to admit, your country will certainly be the greatest in the world for all Americans if all those who don’t agree should leave.

Sure. Just make it out however you want.

Geeessh, scoopy….why don’t YOU DEFEND YOUR ideology on this. I’ve already told ya how ridiculous ya look when ya tell someone to get outta THEIR OWN HOUSE. Question here: WHY DON’T YOU LEAVE AMERICA? Your ideology really isn’t all that great,,,,,it really runs DEEPLY contrary to the very core of American ideals,,,,it is sooooo antithical to what this “Christian” nation believes in as far as “religion” goes.

Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

Originally posted by scoopolard

Oh Karma, you never cease to amaze me. If there was one person on this forum to subscribe to the ridiculousness that is Knife’s ideology, it’d be you. Ah well.

You are ridiculous Scooplard, not me.

Can you try responding and BY actually DEFENDING your ideology? Oh, holy fuck….scat man. THAT has to be in the top 10 of insanely funny hypocritical ironies of all time on Kong. Scoopy, YOU are the 6th degree master of posting a huuuge wall of quotes and then making ONLY a one line response….usually just some dumb crap or an pansy insult.

The only people I ever encounter with your line of thought are on the internet.

Well, there can be a whoooole lot of reasons for that….ya know? A couple of good ones quickly come to mind. LOL

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

Originally posted by scoopolard:

1. I know I’m an individualist. That tends to be a common thread among conservatives, because we feel as though we don’t need others to help us do what everyone should be able to do by themselves.

It appears YOU aren’t able to understand that inidividualism can be seen as being selfishly “bad”….a somewhat insult. AND, ya have it reversed. Bascially, conservatives DO HAVE OTHER’S HELP THEM….they are just to ignorantly arogant to understand how. PLUS, how idiotic of a falacy can one have to believe “EVERYONE” can do for them selves. They just have to totally have their heads up their asses to not understand that there will ALWAYS be members of society that are “different”. AND, when the base working class of America is totally fucked over by BIG BUSINESS….they could use a little help them selves…..DUH.

However, apparently we aren’t as “cold-hearted” as you make us out to be. We still do see that some people are incapable of assisting themselves, and many of us apparently live by the motto: “A measure of a society is how well it treats its weakest members.”

Nah…a few kind-hearted “mild” conservatives is the exception,,,,NOT the rule. I find it interesting that YOU throw in a quote that conservatives, IN GENERAL, actually snear at….INDIVIDUALISM.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
Will is a conservative….a mild one….but, still a conservative. I’m NOT IN THE LEAST interested in finding the many obvious INDEPENDANT opinions that refute his.

Don’t generalize about us.

YUP…right there is one of the strong traits of a true conservative: Hypocrisy. YOU yourself are very good at such generalizations.

2. “Liberals think about everyone…” Don’t flatter yourself. Liberals have a habit of “pretending” this is the case. They are no more or less selfish than the average guy. Don’t fool yourself into thinking like this. It is a fallacy. It is foolish. And it is, put simply, a lie.

First: it is awfully hard to discuss issues when ya use so many hyperboles. There are many, MANY different “levels” of “liberals” who have different “levels” of thinking about EVERYONE. YET, it really doesn’t take much mental ability to understand that “liberal-thinking” is definitely more “generous” to society than the “conservative-CENTRIST-thinking” is…..don’t fool your self into thinking otherwise.

3. I do not find it detestable. I just find the realities of such a system to be very dissuading. It is not nearly as simple as you make it out to be.

Well, DUH…ya manage to understand that few things in life are simple,,,,esp. a universal health care program. The program certainly isn’t simple. BUT, the concept behind it—that which Draconavin pointed out (and YOU failed to address at all)—is extremely simple. Probably because—being an “individualist”—YOU just can’t wrap your mind around it.

4. I don’t know if Karma hates my nation (although I suspect that’s the case), but he is certainly not happy here.

Aha…backing down a bit there—on what I believe (“hatewise”),,,,typical. YET, you are able to devine how happy I am about what….interesting,,,,will I like this new Battleship movie coming out? Dude, let me give ya something to ponder: being unhappy about SOME aspects of our society DOES NOT mean I am totally “not happy here”. Are YOU “happy” w/ every aspect of your car? Are YOU “happy” w/ every aspect of your university? Oooopppps, apparently NOT…YOU are pissed at it and leaving.

And, thus, I’ve instructed him to do something entirely logical: LEAVE.

YUP…just as I suspected,,,YOU don’t know the difference between “instructed” and suggested. I see such “tendancies” to be a strong attribute among certain conservatives.

It’s just like what I’m doing with my own life now. I’m not happy at the university I’m attending. Thus, I’m transferring. I’m LEAVING the university, because I do not like it here. Same thing applies to Karma. He obviously is not happy here. So I’m telling him to LEAVE.

“Leaving” can sometimes be viewed as just simply not being able to hack small adversities…..a trait of life in general. Isn’t that what Sarah Palin said about Obama’s campaign promise to withdrawn troops from Iraq….“It’s not a withdrawal…it’s a SURRENDER”.

Scoopy, YOU are an extremely pathetic example of the true conservative ideology. YOU speak even farther “right” than the Tea Party. I’d find such stances,,,what was it that Softest said,,,oh yeah: chuckle fodder. BUT ALAS, such ideology is dangerous & hurts a whole lot of ppl.

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

1) You said “As long as people pay they’re taxes” in one of your replies. 50% of folks wouldn’t even pay into the system they would be benefitting from in the first place.

shouldn’t you address the problems where they exist? anyway, this totally doesn’t relate to GDP anymore. you’re changing the context.

2) Lol, I’m not trolling, but I’m also not going to provide an entire list as to why I think America is awesome. That’s a long list. So, it appears as we have reached an impasse.

that wasn’t about America. that was about the effectiveness of privatisation from a public perspective. you’re mixing things up.

3) Yeah…see…we’ve tried that too. And it failed miserably.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation

so, first you complain that America is too big, and now you say smaller is worse? you’re not making sense.

4) Actually it’s caused by mostly a large number of 1st generation immigrants (illegal or not), their children

that’s YOU.

, or just stupid people who refuse to let go of their roots despite the fact that their closest tie to their roots is a relative who was actually alive 200 years ago

what do you mean by that?

5) Never said pride made my nation the greatest. Never said someone not thinking we have the greatest nation equates to them hating it.

never implied you said pride makes your nation greatest. i said pride doesn’t necessitate calling it the greatest.
you said a couple times that Karma hates America. but i guess there were other things making you say that.

Now, this un-American thing you’ve brought up here simply depends on how you define “American”. I’ve discovered it’s a fairly flexible term.

just so long as you love America, call it the Greatest in the World, and you “let go of your roots” (whatever that means).

7) Logical fallacy. You assume that I subscribe to the train of thought that someone else does (i.e.: saying that we’re a democracy despite critical analysis of our government). I don’t. I know what we are. And I see it that way.

what?

No. Karma is a bad American because he wants certain systems to be implemented here (systems that studies have shown, Americans simply do not want),

so if your wish is a minority wish, that makes you a bad American? there’s plenty more like him. and the country is too freaking huge to send people out of. this is quite an extreme form of tyranny by majority. when in fact, Karma is part of a global majority.
also it’s a majority along almost the entire Pacific coast and New England. so you would force people out of America that form a majority in very large regions (much bigger than my entire country), only because they are a minority in a freaking half a continent, much of which is in an almost third world state…

furthermore, i want America to change these things as well. why? because America is having huge effects on an international scale. i don’t have to point out how. a lot of this effect is quite negative, and i want that to change; the world wants that to change. but whenever America gets criticised, Americans hide behind “it’s our government, not us”. but whenever the government is criticised Americans say “it’s still a better system than yours because Greatest Nation in the World”, and nothing gets changed, in fact hiding behind “it’s a democracy, even more than any other country”.

we also can’t change it from the outside, because the US is too freaking big and powerful. so, it needs to change internally. it’s millieu needs to allow more public control. ’cause right now their government is literally a bunch of criminals, and making them accountable to the public closer to the level the governments of other countries are accountable to the public is the only way to put a stop to their criminal activities.

if all people that do want the US to progress were to move out, that would only increase this problem.

The problems is that you scoop are an individualist. Accept it.
You only think about me, me, me,

that’s not individualism, that’s egoism.

Neither do many of Africa’s borders, or the border between the US and Canada, or maybe the feistiest measured line across a map, the one between N. and S. Korea.

all of those borders are completely unnatural, imposed by force, and the cause of major regional conflicts and bloodsheds. thanks for proving my point.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

The problems is that you scoop are an individualist. Accept it.
You only think about me, me, me,

that’s not individualism, that’s egoism.

@Omega, I sometimes don’t see the difference. :P

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

Originally posted by Draconavin:

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

The problems is that you scoop are an individualist. Accept it.
You only think about me, me, me,

that’s not individualism, that’s egoism.

@Omega, I sometimes don’t see the difference. :P

LOL….that is the “dark side” of individualism. I might as well toss in another synonym of the “dark side”…selfishness.