|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap.
Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business.
|
On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. 
Sigh...
|
On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position.
good
less spam in the chat
I apologize for the insult, however, but I've had to deal with so many of them that it hurts my head.
|
On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally...
r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh...
Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity.
That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality.
EDIT: Actually, I've not seen a textbook retarded enough to make any claims about equal opportunity being a goal behind the Constitution.
|
@ Caller
I completely agree with what you said that insurance is an example of market failure. However, did you know during the 80's when private HMOs were on the rise, we actually saw a decrease in health care costs? At the time most hospitals were small private institutions, not the combined conglomerates we see today. HMOs could send their patients to different hospitals forcing hospitals to compete by lowering their rates. Multiple HMOs working in the same region had the factors required for market competition to work (No monopoly). Local hospitals reacted by banding together and joining up to control the market share in a particular region and raise prices. HMOs could not afford to send people 100s of miles away, nor would the local population accept this and the HMOs had to pay the hospitals higher prices. This lead to the decline of HMOs in the early 90s as well as consumer rejection of managed care. I know this is only one example, but it is another example of how the market adapts and health care cost rise.
My biggest problem is not the profit motive, but conflict of interest and profit motive. I also don't think excessive profits should be allowed when you're dealing with peoples health. But thats simply my virtue ethics kicking in. Doctors should NOT be allowed to invest in hospitals or other practices, recieve gifts/payments from pharmaceutical companies or other doctors/hosptials/providers. This conflict of interests leads doctors to prescribe particular medications (when generic is just as effective), increases the cost of medical equipment, increases the overuse of medical care, and waste billions annually.
|
On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:
[quote]
r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality.
Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil?
|
United States43768 Posts
I didn't mean medical research providing diminishing returns. I meant healthcare funding. You can always spend more money on your care and get a return on it. From paying the best experts to double check your test results just in case they see something that might buy you a few more days of life to building a new wing of the hospital so you know 100% it's MRSA free. The first few dollars of healthcare spending have a huge impact, a few cheap immunisations can add years to your life. But each dollar spent adds less and less time to your life. In a private system you have a few people spending money wastefully to add a few extra days while that same money would add months for someone else. That is simply inefficient.
|
United States43768 Posts
On September 19 2009 07:14 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap. Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business.
HnR)hT is like a poorly educated person who tries to frame weak analogies that would be far easier to argue against if they made sense. Their vagueness is their only asset and once this has been realised they can be dismissed out of hand. Also he touches children inappropriately.
|
United States43768 Posts
On September 19 2009 07:24 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:
[quote]
Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality. Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil?
Oh man.
|
On September 19 2009 07:16 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. You seem to be confused on American governmental structure. The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. good less spam in the chat I apologize for the insult, however, but I've had to deal with so many of them that it hurts my head.
Your apology is almost as bad as the one from Combat-ex...
You insult me AGAIN before apologizing? Are you serious?
|
On September 19 2009 07:29 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:24 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:45 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:
[quote]
You seem to be confused on American governmental structure.
The FEDERAL government should never involve itself in something it has no right to be involved in. Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government? Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality. Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil? Oh man.
Apparently you didn't see the sarcasm because you're so deep in you ideology.
I was being sarcastic because you sound like a conspiracy nut.
|
United States43768 Posts
On September 19 2009 07:29 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:29 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:24 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:46 Caller wrote:
[quote]
Aside from a philosophical perspective, do you have any other arguments against government?
Likewise, aside from a philosophical perspective, are there any arguments for government? If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in. This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality. Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil? Oh man. Apparently you didn't see the sarcasm because you're so deep in you ideology. I was being sarcastic because you sound like a conspiracy nut.
When people think so little of you they confuse your sarcasm for serious posts it's not them you should be questioning, it's yourself.
Just out of curiousity, what is my ideology? I wasn't aware I had one.
|
On September 19 2009 07:32 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:29 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:29 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:24 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 06:52 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:
[quote]
If you read the constitution, it explains what the federal government has the right to involve itself in.
This country was not founded on equal outcomes for everyone. It was founded on equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone. People with a sense of personal responsibility and ambition will succeed and the lazy and and irresponsible will not. It never should have become a philosophical debate. That's not how this country was founded. If you don't like it, there's no one forcing you to stay. good lord another paultard Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality. Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil? Oh man. Apparently you didn't see the sarcasm because you're so deep in you ideology. I was being sarcastic because you sound like a conspiracy nut. When people think so little of you they confuse your sarcasm for serious posts it's not them you should be questioning, it's yourself. Just out of curiousity, what is my ideology? I wasn't aware I had one.
WOW you REALLY didn't get it.
|
On September 19 2009 07:28 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:14 HnR)hT wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap. Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business. HnR)hT is like a poorly educated person who tries to frame weak analogies that would be far easier to argue against if they made sense. Their vagueness is their only asset and once this has been realised they can be dismissed out of hand. Also he touches children inappropriately.
Ht is pretty out there... he says some of the dumbest shit on this forum in political / religious discussions.
To the guy who talked about HMOs.... cause and correlation are not equivalent. HMOs can in no way drive down health care costs. By definition, their business practices raise the costs. HMOs were founded on the basis that they are for-profit and focused on denying as much care as possible. A decrease in perceived cost would be the temporary result of less care being given and statistical manipulation, nothing more.
|
WOW u really need to STFU and go read glenns beck arguing with idiots since u seem to have adopted some of HIS ideologies, and let real arguments flow in here, instead of what uve been reduced to: one liners.
edit: was meant for the hurtmybackho
|
ignore him hes trolling like no tomorrow
as an experience troll i can recognize my own kind
As for your previous comment:
My bad, I misinterpreted what you said. Yes, I believe that as of right now it is true. However, I also happen to believe that certain medical procedures may cause that trend to reverse. For instance, I know of at least 6 different methods and approaches that may, for one, reduce the rate of aging. This in turn delays the onset of those expensive procedures and helps to make healthcare more economical. Of course, at this time we don't have those methods, so I concur with your current point. But I don't see why we can't accommodate everybody-we just need to expand supply.
|
On September 19 2009 07:33 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:32 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:29 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:29 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:24 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:19 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 07:09 Mindcrime wrote:On September 19 2009 07:05 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:58 Caller wrote:
[quote]
good lord another paultard
Ron Paul has good ideas, and I admire his philosophy and agree with a lot of what he says. But his followers tend to be more cultist than free thinkers, and use the same arguments over and over again, and make the rest of us classical liberals look bad. Have you even read The Road to Serfdom, or The General Theory, Capitalism and Freedom, or one of the other hundreds of books and treatises that he follows? Have you even read Locke's Second Treatise or Hobbes' Leviathan? Before you spasm with your Constitution nonsense, you should at least understand the principles that the Constitution was written and inspired by, as well as read the actual Constitution itself. I stopped at "paultard". When you start calling people names all I hear is "I have nothing left I'm going to label him as a dumbass." I'm done discussing this with you if all you're going to do is insult me. By the way, I don't support Ron Paul and all I get from you calling me that is your ignorance on the thoughts of the American people. The constitution isn't just an old paper we don't read anymore. It's still the central document to our republic. You can't just discount it because it doesn't support your position. Yay for American mythology. Sigh... Sorry, but the framers, much less the founding fathers as a whole, were not all like-minded omni-benevolent figures attempting to do right by everyone in the states and guarantee equality of opportunity. That's what you'll find in middle school textbooks, but it was not the reality. Are you trying to tell me the founding fathers/framers of the constitution are evil? Oh man. Apparently you didn't see the sarcasm because you're so deep in you ideology. I was being sarcastic because you sound like a conspiracy nut. When people think so little of you they confuse your sarcasm for serious posts it's not them you should be questioning, it's yourself. Just out of curiousity, what is my ideology? I wasn't aware I had one. WOW you REALLY didn't get it.
I didn't see the sarcasm because it appears to be even more fucking stupid when read that way.
|
On September 19 2009 07:37 Louder wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:28 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 HnR)hT wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap. Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business. HnR)hT is like a poorly educated person who tries to frame weak analogies that would be far easier to argue against if they made sense. Their vagueness is their only asset and once this has been realised they can be dismissed out of hand. Also he touches children inappropriately. Ht is pretty out there... he says some of the dumbest shit on this forum in political / religious discussions. To the guy who talked about HMOs.... cause and correlation are not equivalent. HMOs can in no way drive down health care costs. By definition, their business practices raise the costs. HMOs were founded on the basis that they are for-profit and focused on denying as much care as possible. A decrease in perceived cost would be the temporary result of less care being given and statistical manipulation, nothing more.
Actually, you're completely wrong. HMOs were founded as non-profit organizations and they were focused on giving as much care as possible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Maintenance_Organization_Act_of_1973 for more details.
|
On September 19 2009 07:45 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:37 Louder wrote:On September 19 2009 07:28 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 HnR)hT wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap. Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business. HnR)hT is like a poorly educated person who tries to frame weak analogies that would be far easier to argue against if they made sense. Their vagueness is their only asset and once this has been realised they can be dismissed out of hand. Also he touches children inappropriately. Ht is pretty out there... he says some of the dumbest shit on this forum in political / religious discussions. To the guy who talked about HMOs.... cause and correlation are not equivalent. HMOs can in no way drive down health care costs. By definition, their business practices raise the costs. HMOs were founded on the basis that they are for-profit and focused on denying as much care as possible. A decrease in perceived cost would be the temporary result of less care being given and statistical manipulation, nothing more. Actually, you're completely wrong. HMOs were founded as non-profit organizations and they were focused on giving as much care as possible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Maintenance_Organization_Act_of_1973 for more details.
That's not entirely accurate, and you know it 
Kaiser Permanente led the charge for the creation of government sponsored, for profit health "care", and Nixon was on board with it. There's more to the story than just the HMO Act of 1973 :|
|
On September 19 2009 10:03 Louder wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2009 07:45 Caller wrote:On September 19 2009 07:37 Louder wrote:On September 19 2009 07:28 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 07:14 HnR)hT wrote:On September 19 2009 06:40 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:36 IHurtMyBackHo wrote:On September 19 2009 06:33 Kwark wrote:On September 19 2009 06:27 BlackJack wrote:
Isn't it equally ironic how much American technology developed in a capitalistic society we use throughout the day before logging on and preaching how America should be more like Europe? Let's all grab our microwaved food and hop on our personal computers and rant against capitalism. Yeah, I'm glad America was here to teach Europe about capitalism. It's not like you guys are on a 100 year lag behind Europe culturally... r u for rela? Conservatives preaching free market Government with minimal regulation, no role besides policing and defence, non intervention where possible overseas (except to protect Americans and American business interests), promoting free trade and economic imperialism. Yeah, someone already did that. Then they moved on. Also that hardcore nationalism and patriotic jingoism. That was done too. In fact, pretty much all the isms were done. Then Europe stopped caring so much about retarded crap. Europe is like a convicted murderer who tries to give his life a new meaning by going on an aggressive moralistic crusade against masturbation. Yes, American conservatives are bad bad people! But perhaps the "cultured" thing to do would be to mind your own business. HnR)hT is like a poorly educated person who tries to frame weak analogies that would be far easier to argue against if they made sense. Their vagueness is their only asset and once this has been realised they can be dismissed out of hand. Also he touches children inappropriately. Ht is pretty out there... he says some of the dumbest shit on this forum in political / religious discussions. To the guy who talked about HMOs.... cause and correlation are not equivalent. HMOs can in no way drive down health care costs. By definition, their business practices raise the costs. HMOs were founded on the basis that they are for-profit and focused on denying as much care as possible. A decrease in perceived cost would be the temporary result of less care being given and statistical manipulation, nothing more. Actually, you're completely wrong. HMOs were founded as non-profit organizations and they were focused on giving as much care as possible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Maintenance_Organization_Act_of_1973 for more details. That's not entirely accurate, and you know it Kaiser Permanente led the charge for the creation of government sponsored, for profit health "care", and Nixon was on board with it. There's more to the story than just the HMO Act of 1973 :|
The key portion of that is the line "government sponsored." And Kaiser Pemanante + Nixon led to the HMO Act of 1973. As so stated from that clip, from Sicko (Michael Moore), and according to the Wikipedia summary of Sicko,
The origins of the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 are presented using a taped conversation between John Ehrlichman and President Richard Nixon on February 17, 1971; Ehrlichman is heard telling Nixon that "...the less care they give them, the more money they make", a plan that Nixon remarked "fine" and "not bad".
Also, the HMO Act of 1973 was already being floated around as an idea at that time, being advocated by the left-wing as a way to lower health insurance costs for everybody, through a government subsidy. As we all know, we got it in the pooper as a result.
It was initially supposed to help provide support for non-profit HMOs, but ended up screwing everybody over as a result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
