Canadian doctor makes anti-Obamacare senator look like a buffoon

page: 25
36
<< 22  23  24   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Wow.. Ok. Lets start with basic stuff.. You seem to be mistaking me for someone who has a completely different viewpoint, which seems to happen frequently.

What do you feel are factors that play into a defensible nation without a standing military?




posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Serdgiam


Wow.. Ok. Lets start with basic stuff.. You seem to be mistaking me for someone who has a completely different viewpoint, which seems to happen frequently.

No worries.

Serdgiam

What do you feel are factors that play into a defensible nation without a standing military?

A direct attack on US soil calls for a standing Army/Military.

Active duty military, if to follow the documents, should not be active unless during a time of war.
Reserve/Guard units are good and were there as the pool to pull from for going active.

And the militia is there for a local level of protection.


Does that answer the question?



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

macman
A direct attack on US soil calls for a standing Army/Military.

Active duty military, if to follow the documents, should not be active unless during a time of war.
Reserve/Guard units are good and were there as the pool to pull from for going active.

And the militia is there for a local level of protection.


I fully agree. Though, I guess technically, we have been in a pretty constant state of war for quite some time...

Anyway, what things do you feel contribute to the strength of a nation that would follow our constitution? We have the obvious things like roads, general infrastructure, etc. Some argue that a healthy nation is also more capable of defending itself. The problem is that this has been contained to what is proposed in the ACA, which is NOT a viable solution.

The tax money we currently give is supposed to be invested back into the nation, but it isnt. Thats where the sleight of hand comes into play, and it is not done by me. Regardless of what aspects we believe are part of this investment, healthcare or not, the People are NOT receiving a return on their investment. This is why we have to talk about constitutional matters in accordance to the constitution rather than the tyrannical government we currently have, and they methods they currently use. They state, that instead of actually investing money they already receive into the nation, that we need to be taxed more to somehow create a more defensible/successful nation.

Their goal is dependence, and yet, so many throw out the baby with the bathwater. We even see this when people talk about how communism/socialism is some danger to the US. It isnt. Corporate oligarchy/MIC is our concern.

All that said, it isnt so much a matter of the concepts causing dependence, but their method. This is extraordinarily important. We can implement systems that do not foster dependence, so that isnt an issue unless you are doing the whole baby/bathwater thing.

See, my concerns all hinge around a defensible nation, and a successful nation. I dont care about party lines, or any of the other divisive BS the government peddles. I feel this centers around creating systems that are not only efficient in investing our money, but foster independence and self-sufficiency. That turns the whole argument on its head, because we dont really have any systems that do this, including the technology we use everyday. Most people are not even capable of thinking in this way, because these systems have been focused on dependence for so long that many dont know how to think of alternatives.

If you can, try to convince me that a nation without a standing army is stronger and more successful when it does not provide healthcare for the People whom would make up the army, and the People who make or break a nation in literally every aspect. Do you think such a system is impossible without creating dependence, and why? If an enemy of the nation were to release a weaponized virus, what system do you think would yield the lowest mortality rate (meaning more left to fight)?
edit on 1-4-2014 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Serdgiam


I fully agree. Though, I guess technically, we have been in a pretty constant state of war for quite some time...

Well, not official war....or maybe it is..guess it depends who is in office and how they think the whole "going to war" actually should be processed.


Serdgiam
Anyway, what things do you feel contribute to the strength of a nation that would follow our constitution? We have the obvious things like roads, general infrastructure, etc. Some argue that a healthy nation is also more capable of defending itself. The problem is that this has been contained to what is proposed in the ACA, which is NOT a viable solution.

Here is what I think.
It isn't about feeling, or what is in my heart.
What does the documents created state for outlining such things.


Serdgiam
The tax money we currently give is supposed to be invested back into the nation, but it isnt. Thats where the sleight of hand comes into play, and it is not done by me. Regardless of what aspects we believe are part of this investment, healthcare or not, the People are NOT receiving a return on their investment. This is why we have to talk about constitutional matters in accordance to the constitution rather than the tyrannical government we currently have, and they methods they currently use. They state, that instead of actually investing money they already receive into the nation, that we need to be taxed more to somehow create a more defensible/successful nation.

Taxes have never really been about "investing" in the people. They started out by funding a basic Fed Govt, who is governed by the Constitution and BoR. It has turned into what we have today. A method to take from some to give to others so politicians can buy votes.


Serdgiam
Their goal is dependence, and yet, so many throw out the baby with the bathwater. We even see this when people talk about how communism/socialism is some danger to the US. It isnt. Corporate oligarchy/MIC is our concern.

No, a lack of morals is the issue.
Without morals, we turn into what we have. A Govt used as the method to "help and care" for people.
That is not what it is there for.
But, with freedom, Morals are not forced as they shouldn't be. If this process was allowed to run its cycle, it would have corrected itself. Instead, we have intervention from the do-gooders that just want everyone to be happy, except those that must fund the do-good actions. Alas, we have the Forgotten Man.


Serdgiam
All that said, it isnt so much a matter of the concepts causing dependence, but their method. This is extraordinarily important. We can implement systems that do not foster dependence, so that isnt an issue unless you are doing the whole baby/bathwater thing.

Giving something to people that perceive it as free will always breed dependency. And trying to take it away is even worse.


Serdgiam
See, my concerns all hinge around a defensible nation, and a successful nation. I dont care about party lines, or any of the other divisive BS the government peddles. I feel this centers around creating systems that are not only efficient in investing our money, but foster independence and self-sufficiency. That turns the whole argument on its head, because we dont really have any systems that do this, including the technology we use everyday. Most people are not even capable of thinking in this way, because these systems have been focused on dependence for so long that many dont know how to think of alternatives.

I agree.


Serdgiam
If you can, try to convince me that a nation without a standing army is stronger and more successful when it does not provide healthcare for the People whom would make up the army, and the People who make or break a nation in literally every aspect.

I don't need to. I am here to state that the actions are not within the confines of the creating documents.
If the process, the correct process is followed, I would have no issue with any of this. I would quietly leave.



Serdgiam
Do you think such a system is impossible without creating dependence, and why?

No. Because it is always sold to people as "free" and human nature kicks in to demonize those that have over those that don't.




Serdgiam
If an enemy of the nation were to release a weaponized virus, what system do you think would yield the lowest mortality rate (meaning more left to fight)?

Don't really know where you are going with that.
System being the method or system being the agent used?
Asymmetrical warfare discussions may be best saved for another topic.



posted on Apr, 1 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   

macman
Here is what I think.
It isn't about feeling, or what is in my heart.
What does the documents created state for outlining such things.


But, they dont state anything about healthcare? Unless I am missing something, which is certainly a possibility.

That said, sticking too much to words that are used can get a bit tricky since they may not have the same confines in other perspectives. In this case, I would include "feeling" and "what is in your heart" as the same as what you are "thinking."

Every single one is subjective.


Serdgiam
Taxes have never really been about "investing" in the people. They started out by funding a basic Fed Govt, who is governed by the Constitution and BoR. It has turned into what we have today. A method to take from some to give to others so politicians can buy votes.


If the government is not investing taxes back into the society from which it is gathered, then where is it going? What is the purpose of the federal government if not to enable a stronger nation? We might have a completely different take on investing, fwiw. Im not talking about stock markets.


Serdgiam
No, a lack of morals is the issue.
Without morals, we turn into what we have. A Govt used as the method to "help and care" for people.
That is not what it is there for.
But, with freedom, Morals are not forced as they shouldn't be. If this process was allowed to run its cycle, it would have corrected itself. Instead, we have intervention from the do-gooders that just want everyone to be happy, except those that must fund the do-good actions. Alas, we have the Forgotten Man.


Morals are subjective. Government should stick to objective realities. Success should not be judged on whether or not people feel good, or, feel negative about those who feel good. Success should be judged on several different objectively verifiable items. What these items are is what this is all about. These items could be considered an investment in a myriad of ways, including return. The issue is that this is only viewed in terms of a monetary investment, wherein, profit is the one and only goal. If we broaden the scope, however, we can see that such pursuits end up being more detrimental to a nation than helpful.

The scientific method itself could be of great use here.


Serdgiam
Giving something to people that perceive it as free will always breed dependency. And trying to take it away is even worse.


Im not sure you understood what I was getting at... I think that if welfare systems exist at all, the resources and tools should be given out and not the "end product" (money). They should give people the tools to make a living for themselves, rather than just throw money at the problem. Because, even for well-meaning people, it is a trap that is extremely difficult to escape.

People want food stamps? Give them the resources to build a greenhouse using aquaponics, as a one time only offer. Something like this will make a very quick distinction between those who simply want to make a life for themselves, and those who wish to abuse the system.

So, in this scenario, we have the exact same concept (welfare), but the method is completely different and it is likely to yield completely different results. These results could be objectively verified using markers such as economy, education, rate of innovation, etc. Though, the limit is that we could only compare it to known variables.



I don't need to. I am here to state that the actions are not within the confines of the creating documents.
If the process, the correct process is followed, I would have no issue with any of this. I would quietly leave.


The documents dont state anything whatsoever about the concept, only the method. And we both probably agree the method is horrendous.


Don't really know where you are going with that.
System being the method or system being the agent used?
Asymmetrical warfare discussions may be best saved for another topic.


Dont worry about it. Like I said, I am concerned with this nations defense and success first and foremost. Including scenarios that may or may not play out, and the governmental systems that could be in place to best cope with any such circumstances.

I do not believe that currently exists, as I feel we are directly witnessing the intentional dismantling of the United States.
edit on 1-4-2014 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   

JohnnyCanuck

projectbane
Well, I think that US and Canadian medical could both do with some improvement.
US - way to expensive and forced upon us.
Canadian - Cheaper, but you get what you pay for, pretty poor!!
Seem to be a lot of cynical, conspiracy-minded ATS types from Canada that disagree with all these American arm-chair experts. The system is only as good as one's last experience with it. Looks like Canadians are pretty happy with their system.

Hands up Canucks...who wants to swap for the American system? Either the present one or the Republican alternative (whatever the hell that is)?



Another Canadian who will suck up any BS their government throws at them. One amazing thing about Canadians is their patriotism, but for what? Non achievement? Promoting mediocrity and spinning it into something remarkable? I see nothing to be proud of!! The government is the BEST at false propaganda. Making the world believe something that is wholey false.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 09:12 PM
link   

projectbane

JohnnyCanuck

projectbane
Well, I think that US and Canadian medical could both do with some improvement.
US - way to expensive and forced upon us.
Canadian - Cheaper, but you get what you pay for, pretty poor!!
Seem to be a lot of cynical, conspiracy-minded ATS types from Canada that disagree with all these American arm-chair experts. The system is only as good as one's last experience with it. Looks like Canadians are pretty happy with their system.

Hands up Canucks...who wants to swap for the American system? Either the present one or the Republican alternative (whatever the hell that is)?



Another Canadian who will suck up any BS their government throws at them. One amazing thing about Canadians is their patriotism, but for what? Non achievement? Promoting mediocrity and spinning it into something remarkable? I see nothing to be proud of!! The government is the BEST at false propaganda. Making the world believe something that is wholey false. Living in Vancouver was the worst time I can think of. Boring, can't get ANYTHING at all, monopolized outlets, poor choice.

However, I do prefer the Canadian gun laws.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
It seems Doctor Martin is very popular with all levels and parties of Canadian government. I guess this means her views are appreciated at the highest levels. Either that or our politicians all like Doc Martin shoes.

Good for her, though. She’d rather be a doctor.




WASHINGTON -- Political offers have been pouring in for a doctor who enthusiastically defended the reputation of Canada's medicare system during some tense exchanges in the U.S. Congress.

Dr. Danielle Martin said she's been courted by political parties at the municipal, provincial and federal level since her appearance last month enjoyed a moment of viral celebrity.

But it's clearly not something the Toronto physician, health-policy professor and vice-president of the Women's College Hospital wants to discuss.



Read more: www.ctvnews.ca...



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 08:09 PM
link   

projectbane
Another Canadian who will suck up any BS their government throws at them....
Gee...since the beginning of the year I've been to my GP, attended an overnight sleep clinic, gone to a plastic surgeon who announced the boo-boo on my arm was skin cancer (BCC) and in the next couple of weeks, I'll have that removed, check back in with the GP, see an internist...and some blood tests. Five bucks out of pocket so far...parking at the overnighter. Yes, damn that government healthcare BS...LOL!



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

You know through all that noise and hissifit what we have in the states is not a government take over,a true government take over would be single pair, and not a bad thing it would have been.



posted on Apr, 14 2014 @ 06:02 PM
link   

JohnnyCanuck

projectbane
Another Canadian who will suck up any BS their government throws at them....
Gee...since the beginning of the year I've been to my GP, attended an overnight sleep clinic, gone to a plastic surgeon who announced the boo-boo on my arm was skin cancer (BCC) and in the next couple of weeks, I'll have that removed, check back in with the GP, see an internist...and some blood tests. Five bucks out of pocket so far...parking at the overnighter. Yes, damn that government healthcare BS...LOL!
...and an update on the skin cancer. Cure cost me $8...oh, the humanity!!





new topics
top topics
 
36
<< 22  23  24   >>

log in

join