Current Events > Do you like socialism?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
karlpilkington4 03/22/21 7:49:53 PM #52:	Do you like socialism? No, I like earning for myself. --- Trump 2024 <cite>karlpilkington4 posted [p:952000780] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote><quote>Do you like socialism?</quote> No, I like earning for myself. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solid Snake07 03/22/21 7:50:45 PM #53:	pure_temper posted... hospital tried to bill $50,000 for a one-week stay after I was a victim of a hit and run Does that strike you as cheaper and better? Obviously insurance paid for it and I was blessed in this regard - can I say the same for most people? No. For underinsured and uninsured people, they'd be fucked. Time to get to the point where these things are not even up to insurance whims and are instead guaranteed to humans simply because they're humans. You think you'll end up a billionaire or something? It's clear what the logical position is on this subject. Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it? --- "People incapable of guilt usually do have a good time" -Detective Rust Cohle <cite>Solid Snake07 posted [p:952000798] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>pure_temper posted... </cite> <quote>hospital tried to bill $50,000 for a one-week stay after I was a victim of a hit and run Does that strike you as cheaper and better? Obviously insurance paid for it and I was blessed in this regard - can I say the same for most people? No. For underinsured and uninsured people, they'd be fucked. Time to get to the point where these things are not even up to insurance whims and are instead guaranteed to humans simply because they're humans. You think you'll end up a billionaire or something? It's clear what the logical position is on this subject.</quote> Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Squall28 03/22/21 7:52:03 PM #54:	I'm not wasting my time on that. I don't care for his NEET theories. Does he actually prove any of it is right in his book? --- You can't go back and change the beginning, but you can start where you are and change the ending. -Misattributed to CS Lewis <cite>Squall28 posted [p:952000831] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>I'm not wasting my time on that. I don't care for his NEET theories. Does he actually prove any of it is right in his book? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Eyeratosthenes 03/22/21 7:52:06 PM #55:	Solid Snake07 posted... Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would how do you even respond to something like this like how do you respond to the person who even says this --- Aiways / Hairistotle <cite>Eyeratosthenes posted [p:952000834] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Solid Snake07 posted... </cite> <quote>Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would</quote>how do you even respond to something like this like how do you respond to the person who even says this </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Broseph_Stalin 03/22/21 7:52:08 PM #56:	I don't think anything has failed as consistently over time while still maintaining a following as socialism has. <cite>Broseph_Stalin posted [p:952000837] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>I don't think anything has failed as consistently over time while still maintaining a following as socialism has. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 7:53:28 PM #57:	Solid Snake07 posted... Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it? What greater safety net is there than UBI tied to inflation, funded by taking away billionaire power? And guaranteed access to free healthcare, funded also by the engine of the economy working for everyone rather than predominately for <10,000 human beings who were almost all just BORN into their future. These things could both be funded sustainably, so why not do it? If someone wants to have a private company to provide some kind of service or technology that improves healthcare, have it be a NASA & SpaceX model and when that technology is so good that it's $0 marginal cost, turn it into a utility. I want my kids to live in a world where they can go to the doctor whenever they need no questions asked and no need to present payment information or insurance information at all. Time to level up. --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952000872] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Solid Snake07 posted... </cite> <quote>Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it?</quote> What greater safety net is there than UBI tied to inflation, funded by taking away billionaire power? And guaranteed access to free healthcare, funded also by the engine of the economy working for everyone rather than predominately for <10,000 human beings who were almost all just BORN into their future. These things could both be funded sustainably, so why not do it? If someone wants to have a private company to provide some kind of service or technology that improves healthcare, have it be a NASA & SpaceX model and when that technology is so good that it's $0 marginal cost, turn it into a utility. I want my kids to live in a world where they can go to the doctor whenever they need no questions asked and no need to present payment information or insurance information at all. Time to level up. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#58	Post #58 was unavailable or deleted.
Questionmarktarius 03/22/21 7:57:31 PM #59:	mrgoatthief posted... but a lot of the people that show up to the meetings are less so and make me nervous There's a certain point where the realization of "this is going to harm me" sets in, and altruistic intent can can only hold out against that for so long. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:952000998] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>mrgoatthief posted... </cite> <quote>but a lot of the people that show up to the meetings are less so and make me nervous</quote>There's a certain point where the realization of "this is going to harm me" sets in, and altruistic intent can can only hold out against that for so long. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 7:58:37 PM #60:	Squall28 posted... I'm not wasting my time on that. I don't care for his NEET theories. Does he actually prove any of it is right in his book? I'll just tell you then. Here's the list I mentioned. 1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3) Abolition of all right of inheritance 4) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5) Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6) Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8) Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10) Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952001037] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Squall28 posted... </cite> <quote>I'm not wasting my time on that. I don't care for his NEET theories. Does he actually prove any of it is right in his book?</quote> I'll just tell you then. Here's the list I mentioned. 1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3) Abolition of all right of inheritance 4) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5) Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6) Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8) Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10) Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Solid Snake07 03/22/21 7:59:02 PM #61:	pure_temper posted... What greater safety net is there than UBI tied to inflation, funded by taking away billionaire power? And guaranteed access to free healthcare, funded also by the engine of the economy working for everyone rather than predominately for <10,000 human beings who were almost all just BORN into their future. Because you're ignoring a mountain of nuance and consequences for what you're proposing. You just keep saying we need to "level up" and "move to star trek" I can appreciate your optimism, but let's stay rooted in reality. I'm not debating economics 300 years from now that none of us can possibly comprehend. I'm talking about the here and now. --- "People incapable of guilt usually do have a good time" -Detective Rust Cohle <cite>Solid Snake07 posted [p:952001046] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>pure_temper posted... </cite> <quote>What greater safety net is there than UBI tied to inflation, funded by taking away billionaire power? And guaranteed access to free healthcare, funded also by the engine of the economy working for everyone rather than predominately for <10,000 human beings who were almost all just BORN into their future.</quote> Because you're ignoring a mountain of nuance and consequences for what you're proposing. You just keep saying we need to "level up" and "move to star trek" I can appreciate your optimism, but let's stay rooted in reality. I'm not debating economics 300 years from now that none of us can possibly comprehend. I'm talking about the here and now. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 7:59:13 PM #62:	Questionmarktarius posted... There's a certain point where the realization of "this is going to harm me" sets in, and altruistic intent can can only hold out against that for so long. Yeah this is totally a valid point, and it's why I call out tankies. They are truly detrimental to the cause. --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952001055] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>There's a certain point where the realization of "this is going to harm me" sets in, and altruistic intent can can only hold out against that for so long.</quote> Yeah this is totally a valid point, and it's why I call out tankies. They are truly detrimental to the cause. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 8:01:00 PM #63:	Solid Snake07 posted... Because you're ignoring a mountain of nuance and consequences for what you're proposing. You just keep saying we need to "level up" and "move to star trek" I can appreciate your optimism, but let's stay rooted in reality. I'm not debating economics 300 years from now that none of us can possibly comprehend. I'm talking about the here and now. It's not 300 years from now. We could fund it today and plenty of people have desscribed how. You follow Bernie Sanders at all? Or Andrew Yang? Or Sam Altman's piece on UBI? https://moores.samaltman.com/ < 10 years till $13,500 UBI per adult. I don't see any reason why college and healthcare won't also be free by then, if we really want them to be. Free to regular people, funded mostly by changing how we view ownership of mega-corps and wealth taxes on people with more than $50 million in net worth. --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952001130] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Solid Snake07 posted... </cite> <quote>Because you're ignoring a mountain of nuance and consequences for what you're proposing. You just keep saying we need to "level up" and "move to star trek" I can appreciate your optimism, but let's stay rooted in reality. I'm not debating economics 300 years from now that none of us can possibly comprehend. I'm talking about the here and now.</quote> It's not 300 years from now. We could fund it today and plenty of people have desscribed how. You follow Bernie Sanders at all? Or Andrew Yang? Or Sam Altman's piece on UBI? https://moores.samaltman.com/ < 10 years till $13,500 UBI per adult. I don't see any reason why college and healthcare won't also be free by then, if we really want them to be. Free to regular people, funded mostly by changing how we view ownership of mega-corps and wealth taxes on people with more than $50 million in net worth. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Intro2Logic 03/22/21 8:04:52 PM #64:	Solid Snake07 posted... But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare Because it's wrong to have tens of thousands die each year owing to an inability to afford care, and countless more put off care due to the cost. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/07/americans-healthcare-medical-costs that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? What makes you think this, exactly? Medicare and Medicaid have lower overhead costs than the private sector. Countries with universal healthcare spend far less per capita than the US. And again that's if you can prioritize "efficiency" over "death toll." --- Have you tried thinking rationally? <cite>Intro2Logic posted [p:952001263] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Solid Snake07 posted... </cite> <quote>But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare</quote>Because it's wrong to have tens of thousands die each year owing to an inability to afford care, and countless more put off care due to the cost. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/07/americans-healthcare-medical-costs <quote>that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would?</quote> What makes you think this, exactly? Medicare and Medicaid have lower overhead costs than the private sector. Countries with universal healthcare spend far less per capita than the US. And again that's if you can prioritize "efficiency" over "death toll." </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Squall28 03/22/21 8:05:56 PM #65:	pure_temper posted... I'll just tell you then. Here's the list I mentioned. 1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3) Abolition of all right of inheritance 4) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5) Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6) Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8) Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10) Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. Again. It's just listing ideas. No proof. --- You can't go back and change the beginning, but you can start where you are and change the ending. -Misattributed to CS Lewis <cite>Squall28 posted [p:952001306] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>pure_temper posted... </cite> <quote>I'll just tell you then. Here's the list I mentioned. 1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3) Abolition of all right of inheritance 4) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5) Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6) Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8) Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. 10) Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.</quote> Again. It's just listing ideas. No proof. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 8:06:09 PM #66:	To be clear Solid Snake07, if you're advocating for a beefy UBI so we can actually have people purchasing quality plans, that's effectively similar to just using taxes to pay for healthcare The difference being that instead you just make the UBI bigger. I could be convinced of this approach but it'd require that health insurance dinosaur companies really change their business model to make it about proving superior outcomes to the consumers of the health plans. --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952001315] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>To be clear Solid Snake07, if you're advocating for a beefy UBI so we can actually have people purchasing quality plans, that's effectively similar to just using taxes to pay for healthcare The difference being that instead you just make the UBI bigger. I could be convinced of this approach but it'd require that health insurance dinosaur companies really change their business model to make it about proving superior outcomes to the consumers of the health plans. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pure_temper 03/22/21 8:06:44 PM #67:	Squall28 posted... Again. It's just listing ideas. No proof. What are you talking about? proof for what? We've already done or are doing a good chunk of that list <_< --- proudclad LAYIN DOWN THE SMACK - Error1355 Christian Marxism actually makes sense. (Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc too!) <cite>pure_temper posted [p:952001331] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Squall28 posted... </cite> <quote>Again. It's just listing ideas. No proof.</quote> What are you talking about? proof for what? We've already done or are doing a good chunk of that list <_< </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
indica 03/22/21 8:09:53 PM #68:	Solid Snake07 posted... Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it? Most people can't afford their own. People in the US pay more for healthcare than any other country in the world, by far, and the worst affected are minorities. Healthcare should be a right not a privilege --- There is no good. There is no evil. There just is. <cite>indica posted [p:952001434] in Do you lik... [t:79363051]...</cite> <quote>Solid Snake07 posted... </cite> <quote>Our healthcare system is not exacly a free market, and you can make a good arguement that it shouldn't be for a lot of reasons. But most people, like you or I can afford our own health insurance. Why should the government completely take over the healthcare system to provide everyone, most of which can afford their own, with healthcare that they can't possibly operate as efficiently as a market would? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to focus on providing safety nets for those who can't afford it?</quote>Most people can't afford their own. People in the US pay more for healthcare than any other country in the world, by far, and the worst affected are minorities. Healthcare should be a right not a privilege </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > Do you like socialism? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Do you like socialism?