UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#41
I don't really see what the fucking point of local government is, if the Feds will just step in and take over if they don't agree. Might as well just make every law federal, get rid of states, sounds like a great plan.

The federal government should have no right to override state law, but that's just me.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#42
"Ron Paul wouldn't help much I don't think...everything would go private, and this country would be on some super-capitalism shit, which would leave everyone in the dust."

Then how the fuck can you support him? :::smh:::

But your right, people would be even more fucked. There would be no "safety nets" for the poor, or homeless. It would be every man for himself (or, in Ron Pauls warped mind, he thinks the Church could operate hospitals and people would simply donate money and pick up expensive hospitals bills for the fuck of it).

As fucked up as this government currently is, at least they are smart enough to realize not having a safety net would be a very bad thing (not just for the people, but for them too). Workers spent many years and gave up many lives fighting the powers that be to get certain rights (8 hour work days, healthcare, etc., etc., etc.), and slowly they are being taken away. And Ron Paul would certainly eliminate most of them (but hey, at least you could fire your Uzi in the air while smoking a fat blunt, right?) .
 
Nov 21, 2007
839
0
0
42
#43
But your right, people would be even more fucked. There would be no "safety nets" for the poor, or homeless. It would be every man for himself (or, in Ron Pauls warped mind, he thinks the Church could operate hospitals and people would simply donate money and pick up expensive hospitals bills for the fuck of it).
I didnt hear about him saying the church and donations would pick up the tab. That would be a new one. But let me put it like this. I make approx. 20,000 a year. I only get to actually hold, in my hands, about 12,000 of that money. If I started getting everything i actually worked for, i would have plenty of money to donate. I have donated before, but its such a hassle to make sure im not going to need that little bit extra during the week that Its not worth it..

As fucked up as this government currently is, at least they are smart enough to realize not having a safety net would be a very bad thing (not just for the people, but for them too). Workers spent many years and gave up many lives fighting the powers that be to get certain rights (8 hour work days, healthcare, etc., etc., etc.), and slowly they are being taken away. And Ron Paul would certainly eliminate most of them (but hey, at least you could fire your Uzi in the air while smoking a fat blunt, right?) .
lol, should the U.N. have its way, we wouldnt even be able to own a .22 with rubber bullets.

And thats one of the main points, IMO. The freedoms of our country are being usurped by the U.N. They have documents on how to dis-arm us in case martial law were imposed. They have a document called the "bio diversity assesment" in which they believe depopulation is a good thing, (google: malthusian catastrophe)
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#44
I didnt hear about him saying the church and donations would pick up the tab. That would be a new one.
I watched him on live TV last night, cant remember which fucktards show it was...

But let me put it like this. I make approx. 20,000 a year. I only get to actually hold, in my hands, about 12,000 of that money. If I started getting everything i actually worked for, i would have plenty of money to donate. I have donated before, but its such a hassle to make sure im not going to need that little bit extra during the week that Its not worth it..
Ron Paul wants to get rid of the federal income tax... not the state income tax. So you will have higher state income tax and no federal. Other taxes would be raised, gas tax, property tax, etc. You still wouldn't take home all 20 g's.

lol, should the U.N. have its way, we wouldnt even be able to own a .22 with rubber bullets.

And thats one of the main points, IMO. The freedoms of our country are being usurped by the U.N. They have documents on how to dis-arm us in case martial law were imposed. They have a document called the "bio diversity assesment" in which they believe depopulation is a good thing, (google: malthusian catastrophe)
The UN is taking are freedoms, really?? That's news to me.

And yes, I'm pro-gun myself and last time I checked there are other candidates that are as well. No one is taking amerika's millions and millions of guns away. It will never happen.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#45
As I said, I don't support anyone because I am NOT voting. Just because I might like a couple of his fucking ideas, doesn't mean I'm down for his cause 100%.

How many times do you (2-0-sixx and CB) need me to say this? I don't care if either of you think I don't have that right, cause I'll do whatever I want pretty much (and I do).

Just cause I like the idea of legalizing weed, and he does too, doesn't mean I support him. I think he's got some good ideas, like how he DID NOT vote for the war in Iraq, and how he voted against the Patriot Act...THAT I do like, the capitalism shit, I do not.

I don't have to like every idea that a mother fucker has.
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#46
woah there, sorry but I don't read all the posts (including this thread). I was under the impression you were a RP supporter. If I ever read you specifically saying you don't support Ron Paul, my bad, I forgot. If not, fuck off you seattle hippie
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#47
(but hey, at least you could fire your Uzi in the air while smoking a fat blunt, right?) .
Are you drinking the same shit as CB?

Just cause I feel weed should be legal, and we should be able to have guns, doesn't mean I'm going to vote for him (as I've said, OVER AND FUCKING OVER NOW), I am not going to vote.

My idea of having weapons, isn't walking down the fucking street with an M-16 and saying, "it's my right." You seem to think that, or at least, you are talking to me like you think that's what I am saying. Read this..the only reason I'd want a gun, is protection in my home. I would get a concealed permit, but I wouldn't carry a gun on me everywhere I went. You sir, from the impression I am getting, are being an immature thinker in the way your are analyzing why ideas and/or thoughts. Just cause you may not agree, or don't see how someone could say or think that, doesn't mean it's immature or impossible or any of the other words in the English language that you could choose to describe said situation. :)

It's like you say, if you don't exercise your rights, you will have them taken away. People should be fighting to keep their right to bear arms....and should be fighting to keep the gov't out of our personal lives, UNLESS the individual citizen asks for help.

EDIT* Just saw your post above....LOL...so what I said is void except to further the point that I don't support any candidate(s).
 
Nov 21, 2007
839
0
0
42
#48
Ron Paul wants to get rid of the federal income tax... not the state income tax. So you will have higher state income tax and no federal. Other taxes would be raised, gas tax, property tax, etc. You still wouldn't take home all 20 g's.
Im going to say thats an interesting point, But i dont think the raise would be significant enough to duplicate the fed tax.. but im going to look into that..

The UN is taking are freedoms, really?? That's news to me.

And yes, I'm pro-gun myself and last time I checked there are other candidates that are as well. No one is taking amerika's millions and millions of guns away. It will never happen.
Yeah, google UN, Disarmament..

http://disarmament2.un.org/issue.htm


CONVENTIONAL ARMS (including Practical Disarmament Measures)

a. Small arms and Light weapons

The Secretary-General in his Millennium Report in 2000 gave a special focus to small arms, which were described as “weapons of mass destruction” in terms of the carnage they cause. An estimated 40 to 60 per cent of the world’s trade in small arms is illicit. Controlling the proliferation of illicit weapons is a necessary first step towards the non-proliferation of small arms.

Within the UN system, an internal mechanism called CASA (Coordinating Action on Small Arms) was put in place in 1998 to coordinate small arms control activities throughout the system with the Department for Disarmament Affairs (DDA) as the focal point; to set priorities; to encourage public advocacy of efforts to address small arms issues; to increase the Organization’s ability to provide assistance to countries that seek such help; and to advance the United Nations broader disarmament goals.
and it goes on about regional disarmament and other things.. im kinda rushin this post, and will elaborate on it later..
 

Mr Ceza

Xplosive Magazine
Jul 10, 2002
4,879
806
0
48
#49
I think our priorities are fucked up as individuals, we fuck off MONEY all the time. Other countries have Universal Health Care and it works fine. I'm down with a side tax for it on my pay check stubs, but let MY MONEY go to the Hospital, clinic, DOCTOR who actually does something and cares for ME!
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#50
Ron Paul said some good shit on the debate the other night.

"The reason we can't afford health care if because we're fighting a trillion dollar war in Iraq."

Then he went on to talk about spending that money here etc....but he's not for universal health care, all those republicans want private individual policies for the most part...except i think romney who has a new plan in NH where almost everyone is covered....
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#51
What a joke line that is.

The money I pay in taxes to fund the war in Iraq would not come close to providing me with any kind of reasonable and unsubsidized heath care.

If the money my company pays in taxes to fund the war in Iraq were given back they would put it in their pockets instead of raising their contribution to my health care.

If the companies/doctors/etc were given back the money they pay in taxes to fund the war in Iraq they would not lower the cost of health care – they would pocket it.



Hey I Am – The reason we don’t have health care in the U.S. is because of the cost to keep the White House painted white. If you voted you should vote for me cuz I’m not a capitalist and I can make up complete bullshit just as easy as Ron Paul.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#52
Hey I Am – The reason we don’t have health care in the U.S. is because of the cost to keep the White House painted white. If you voted you should vote for me cuz I’m not a capitalist and I can make up complete bullshit just as easy as Ron Paul.
I get the impression you think that I think what he said was a great idea or that he's got a fool-proof plan to make the US function properly again, not the case.

They all make up bullshit. I didn't say what he said was going to happen. I acknowledge the fact that 99.9% of politicians are professional bullshitters.

But I didn't know the doctors office was paying for the Iraq war....I thought it was kind of coming out of all sorts of taxes, like the ones that individuals pay to the gov't.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#54
Good shit, and great idea, are not the same. If you can't figure that one out, I feel very sorry for your comprehension skills. He made a good point within his circle of Republican counterparts. I don't think it's an idea that would be good if set in place.

Ask me if you don't understand, rather than being a fuck head.
 
Nov 21, 2007
839
0
0
42
#56
whats the exact opposite of a christian libertarian?

an athiest communist..

:cool:


not that theres anything wrong, just puttin in perspective the justification for some of these opinions.. i can say im not for communism because i can bust my ass day and night for a living in a communist country and not make shit because my money goes to a collective whole, which includes lazy fucks who want a free ride..
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#57
whats the exact opposite of a christian libertarian?

an athiest communist..

:cool:


not that theres anything wrong, just puttin in perspective the justification for some of these opinions.. i can say im not for communism because i can bust my ass day and night for a living in a communist country and not make shit because my money goes to a collective whole, which includes lazy fucks who want a free ride..
Again, there are other incentives for working hard other than just money. Under communism, the incentive to come up with more efficient ways to do things is that we'd have to work less time to do the same amount of work. The amount of necessary labor needed to produce the things we need like food, housing, etc. would gradually decrease. So the harder you work, the less work you have to do and the more time you can spend it on other things.

Plus, all the wealth generated socially wouldn't be going into a few private hands, it would be used to provide better wages, benefits, healthcare, education, safety conditions, new technology that could reduce the working day, etc., so this would benefit society. It would be in your own interest to work hard.

And if you want to be lazy and not work you will not receive any benefits that helping the community provides. ("from each according to their ability, to each according to his need" meaning you contribute what you can to the community, and take what you need in return.)
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#59
Too bad there were over 45 million people without healthcare prior to the Iraq/Afghan wars.
Too bad it really doesn't matter cause Bush is the one in office, not the person I was talking about.

Are you telling me that $1 Trillion would not support a nationalized system of healthcare?
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#60
no, not if they don't spend it on health care (obviously).

There will always be other things to spend on. Like under Clinton there was no major war, but that didn't change the fact 45million people were without healthcare insurance, and there was a massive attack on working and poor citizens (attack on welfare, foodstamps, etc.). We are the richest country in the world. Even with the wars we could still provide universal healthcare.