Well Played, Sirs And Ma'ams
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
londonfog
Well-Known Member
ummmm jeff go back and read again.... that question was for Roy and it did not pertain to what I was saying to you... My point to you is it seems that you bitchn about something you not even paying for in fact you may be the one that the rest of us are paying for ...and with that said I don't mind paying to insure that you and your family have health care
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid I'll be a bit wordy in my answer, read the whole thing and you will understand.
I think that you should be free to participate in giving ALL of your money to that which YOU believe in as long as you aren't initiating aggression against another. Your collective use of "we" is not something I'm willing to accept as a given when it comes to making decisions that others should make concerning their own life. We are all individuals.
People should not be forced to pay for something they do not use or do not want. People should pay for what they use or voluntarily wish to donate to others. Anything taken under the threat of force from a peaceful person who politely declines to participate is extortion. Forcing peaceful people to participate in something they don't agree with is morally wrong. Using something and expecting another to subsidize you or asking another entity (GOVERNMENT) to make others subsidize you or your ideas under the threat of force is wrong. Pay for what YOU want, what you use and leave others alone.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Dude that would never work...thats like some real hippie $hit....lol...people wouldn't want to pay for nothing but use everything...take roads...your taxes pay for road and highway repair( and don't say gas tax pay that..no damn gas tax pay for pot holes in my city)....25% of the funds used to build roads and other infrastructure for automobiles comes from general funds, because fuel taxes or registration fees simply do not cover the total cost. so we can start there....should we pay taxes for the road and would you .???
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You didn't understand my post. I am not proposing people pay for noting, but use everything. Might I suggest you really read it?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
London Fog, you cannot convince me that the initiation of force is acceptable. You remain locked into what you perceive as "reality".
Today's reality will be tomorrow's fairy tale. People used to believe the world was flat and witches needed to be burned at the stake. There are still some people today that believe you shouldn't own your body and refuse to accept that ANY initiation of force is unacceptable. You still want to justify the initiation of force, by touting forced health care, and fail to recognize your rationalizations when you do.
What you perceive to be as a good result through the initiation of force doesn't justify it. Of course people should pay for what they use. Of course people have a natural right to defend themselves when others initiate force against them. The solution to world prosperity and peace? Don't be the one to initiate force, not hippie shit, more like Vulcan logic and no I do not have pointed ears.
You, not me, nor a thousand people that I can convince own YOUR life, your wallet, your property. You, not me are responsible for your choices and your obligations. If a person doesn't use the roads, I won't be sending somebody to take their money for the maintenance of it, that's all. If a person doesn't want to participate in something, leave them alone. What is wrong with that?
Today's reality will be tomorrow's fairy tale. People used to believe the world was flat and witches needed to be burned at the stake. There are still some people today that believe you shouldn't own your body and refuse to accept that ANY initiation of force is unacceptable. You still want to justify the initiation of force, by touting forced health care, and fail to recognize your rationalizations when you do.
What you perceive to be as a good result through the initiation of force doesn't justify it. Of course people should pay for what they use. Of course people have a natural right to defend themselves when others initiate force against them. The solution to world prosperity and peace? Don't be the one to initiate force, not hippie shit, more like Vulcan logic and no I do not have pointed ears.
You, not me, nor a thousand people that I can convince own YOUR life, your wallet, your property. You, not me are responsible for your choices and your obligations. If a person doesn't use the roads, I won't be sending somebody to take their money for the maintenance of it, that's all. If a person doesn't want to participate in something, leave them alone. What is wrong with that?
londonfog
Well-Known Member
I did ...and public schools how do you think they are ran....some people would say hey I don't have a kid why do i pay ???? same reason some pay for roads when they don't have a car ....and hell I love the library but others may say "go away books I care not to read"...you see it could go on and on .....so we have taxes so all can enjoy the good that government can offer...now true you have some politicians who are out to get rich and pass laws to benefit them....that's the source of your problem...greed...follow the money and you will see that its not what we do state-side that causes your taxes to expand... its the money that we spend and send outside the states that you should be screamin about...
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Books and education can exist outside the realm of extortion. A better question you might want to ponder is why home schoolers score so high on the public schools standardized tests?
The source of my problem is not greed. It isn't me, that insists through force that others must comply with my ideas.
Remember, I'm the one that says "you do what you want as long as you pay for it and live peacefully." Geez a minute ago I was a hippie and now you are straw manning me as "greedy".
"Enjoy the good the government can offer" ? An offer to be valid must be something another can accept or not accept and suffer no harm for not accepting it. An "offer" made by any entity, the mafia, government, or the boogie man that threatens harm if not accepted is not really an offer....it is a threat.
I have followed the money. I don't want anyone to kill anyone on my behalf or to jail them for not harming another. I want YOU to be free to enjoy your life, but not to insist how I or any other person will enjoy mine. Like it or not, you cannot say the same.
I've always maintained, the proof is in the pudding. People can paint a glorious picture but that does not make it so. The union man tries to do so yet fails miserable. This part, part 4 is 9:38 minutes long
at the 8:45 mark a comment that is easy to miss yet speaks volumes.
"We try to find the problems before anyone calls us with it"
If you want to solve a problem treat the cause not the symptom.
[video=youtube;lTJ3dOYcAsw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJ3dOYcAsw[/video]
at the 8:45 mark a comment that is easy to miss yet speaks volumes.
"We try to find the problems before anyone calls us with it"
If you want to solve a problem treat the cause not the symptom.
[video=youtube;lTJ3dOYcAsw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJ3dOYcAsw[/video]
[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
I wouldn't wipe my ass with Fucks media, Murdoch's intelligence-insulting corporate propaganda tool - you should stay away from the gutter-press and restrict your sources to REALITY-based media or you won't be taken seriously. The cited piece is classic, a tired bit of union-bashing - must've been a slow news day. It's disgusting to watch a well-paid, slippery-smooth creep of a tv interviewer browbeating an honest worker about his wages when he probably makes more in a month than the union guy brings home in a year. He's lucky the union guy didn't shove the microphone down his ignorant fucking throat.
Instead of attacking unions for fighting to make sure at least some of the real workforce make a living wage - in race-to-the-bottom Amerika - let's hear your opinion of the parasites of Wall Street and the other capitalist sponges that leach off the real productivity of the American working class.
[/FONT]"Ronald Reagan began the war on the middle class with his supply-side economics. Its very purpose, according to David Stockman, Reagans Budget Director, was to transfer wealth and income upwards. It cut the marginal tax rate on the highest income earners from 75% to 35% while dramatically expanding spending for war. The results were two-fold: massive federal debt and an astonishing rise in the share of income and wealth going to those who were already the wealthiest people in the world.
The national debt quadrupled between 1980 and 1992. George W. Bush would repeat Reagans policies and double it again between 2000 and 2008. Meanwhile, the share of national income going to the top 1% more than doubled, from 9% to 24%. The share going to the top one-tenth of 1% of income earners more than tripled. We now have the most unequal distribution of income in the developing world and the inequality is growing rapidly.
Shifts of this magnitude over such short periods of time have never been seen in American history. With the rich getting much, much richer, its means that everybody else is getting poorer. And in fact, real wages for median workers are lower today than they were in 1973. Indeed, while the inflation-adjusted income of the bottom fifth of workers fell by $6,900 between 1979 and 2007, the top 1% saw its annual income increase by $741,000![FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"
- from [/FONT]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26821.htm[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
When you're finished with the unions next it'll be Mexicans, or non-white immigrants - anything but the real source of the problem, an ethically-challenged economic elite who have been plundering the nation for decades. But your ideology gives you firm boundaries, and one thing YOU MUST NOT DO is challenge the ruling elite! That would be, like, treason or something! You can only piss on whoever the elite has decided to attack - and I guess this month its unions.
So restrict your attacks to that shrinking pool of unionized American labour who make a decent living while performing necessary work - and leave the bankers and capitalists to the multibillion dollar profits you the taxpayer gave them, for selling all those excellent mortgages.
Real smart. [/FONT][/FONT]
I wouldn't wipe my ass with Fucks media, Murdoch's intelligence-insulting corporate propaganda tool - you should stay away from the gutter-press and restrict your sources to REALITY-based media or you won't be taken seriously. The cited piece is classic, a tired bit of union-bashing - must've been a slow news day. It's disgusting to watch a well-paid, slippery-smooth creep of a tv interviewer browbeating an honest worker about his wages when he probably makes more in a month than the union guy brings home in a year. He's lucky the union guy didn't shove the microphone down his ignorant fucking throat.
Instead of attacking unions for fighting to make sure at least some of the real workforce make a living wage - in race-to-the-bottom Amerika - let's hear your opinion of the parasites of Wall Street and the other capitalist sponges that leach off the real productivity of the American working class.
[/FONT]"Ronald Reagan began the war on the middle class with his supply-side economics. Its very purpose, according to David Stockman, Reagans Budget Director, was to transfer wealth and income upwards. It cut the marginal tax rate on the highest income earners from 75% to 35% while dramatically expanding spending for war. The results were two-fold: massive federal debt and an astonishing rise in the share of income and wealth going to those who were already the wealthiest people in the world.
The national debt quadrupled between 1980 and 1992. George W. Bush would repeat Reagans policies and double it again between 2000 and 2008. Meanwhile, the share of national income going to the top 1% more than doubled, from 9% to 24%. The share going to the top one-tenth of 1% of income earners more than tripled. We now have the most unequal distribution of income in the developing world and the inequality is growing rapidly.
Shifts of this magnitude over such short periods of time have never been seen in American history. With the rich getting much, much richer, its means that everybody else is getting poorer. And in fact, real wages for median workers are lower today than they were in 1973. Indeed, while the inflation-adjusted income of the bottom fifth of workers fell by $6,900 between 1979 and 2007, the top 1% saw its annual income increase by $741,000![FONT=Arial, sans-serif]"
- from [/FONT]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26821.htm[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
When you're finished with the unions next it'll be Mexicans, or non-white immigrants - anything but the real source of the problem, an ethically-challenged economic elite who have been plundering the nation for decades. But your ideology gives you firm boundaries, and one thing YOU MUST NOT DO is challenge the ruling elite! That would be, like, treason or something! You can only piss on whoever the elite has decided to attack - and I guess this month its unions.
So restrict your attacks to that shrinking pool of unionized American labour who make a decent living while performing necessary work - and leave the bankers and capitalists to the multibillion dollar profits you the taxpayer gave them, for selling all those excellent mortgages.
Real smart. [/FONT][/FONT]
typical response from a person who wants to continue to use force in order to get what they want. Ironic that you promote the same agenda the union scumbag did in the video.
You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]
All one has to do is look at the cost of American made union cars and foreign imports to see the impact associated with union compensation. Unions have priced themselves out of the market and are not cost effective.[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]
Hello????? Among other things, the massive debt is a result of uncontrolled spending
You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif]
[/FONT]
easy enough. Quit electing politicians who are against the free market. Since when is Congress the ones we should look to to run our economy? We have seen the policies they put into place cause more destruction than relief in the long run.
You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
A completely baseless point you made up here. You have absolutely no proof this would be attempted and to even mention it is the act of a drama queen.
You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
[FONT=Century Schoolbook, serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT]
You didn't refute one fact in the video. Ignore and deny are your tactics I see.
Make a decent living???? Unions make a lot more than non union workers. Who is paying for that? You and me, sport, you and me.
Anytime you SET wages you create a market imbalance. Prices rise and the ones who can afford the increase are the overpaid workers not the average joe. So now the disparity becomes greater. What do you have against Middle Class America that you are wanting him to over pay for products?
You didn't say anything to refute the facts in the video.
If that is the case I applaud Jeff. Usually when you rob Peter to pay Paul , Paul is all for it.
then pay my share if you don't mind so much. That's the problem with your thinking. You don't go far enough. You want to make decisions with MY money that you have no business doing. You want to forcibly take money from me to pay for your cause. That's stealing and it's immoral, no matter how good the cause is perceived to be.
There are other ways to lower the costs of health care besides taking my money against my will. Choking off the free market is NOT the way to do it.
jeff f
New Member
give me your address and i will send you my insurance bills. since i have a 500 deductable and a 3000 catastrophic deductable, it wont cost you more than 3500 per year. oh, and i have a 3 dollar copay for generic, 9 bucks for name brand and 22 for optional stuff like rogaine or viagra etc. i only get 3 regular prescriptions which total 34 monthly.
echelon1k1
New Member
that's five;
- Envies others and believes others envy him/her
- Envies others and believes others envy him/her
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
bucky, i think you have something stuck to the bottom of your shoe
i need my sketchy etchy scraping stick, where did i leave it now?
BrewsNBuds
Active Member
Man I almost forgot about the witch girl from Delaware. I'd rather have Christine lie to me straight to my face every day about Obamacare than that old crow from Kansas.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
5 years ahead of the SCOTUS.
..this guy's our wildcard
Similar threads
