It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why I decided to oppose universal healthcare

page: 11
13
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Ohanka

I work hard to earn every cent. Why should I pay for someone else's healthcare?


You don't. You pay taxes. If the state decides it's in their interest to have a healthy population they'll put some of the money into healthcare.

And practically everyone will be better off because of it.

Now if you don't want to pay the taxes there's always Libya and Somalia. They don't have a functioning state so the evil government won't come and take your money to stop sickly infants from dying.




posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: BubbaJoe

Theoretically, under universal healthcare, those who would have perished at the hands of natural selection are saved, which over time, increases their share in society. Natural selection would have maintained weak few. It is expected, from a theoretical standpoint, that weak would increase with universal healthcare.

Compare today's society with just a few decades ago, people are less healthy due to advancements in medicines that saved a lot of people that wouldn't have made it in the past.


Do you have source? That is all I asked, else all of ignorance you have proclaimed in this thread is you own opinion, lets identify as that, and then consider the source.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: TerryDon79

Nop. That's up to nature. For every person, there are trillions of bacteria. The weak are killed by nature, not by me. I wouldn't want to pay for someone else's healthcare with my hard earned money. It's not fair.


You just summed up eugenics pretty well.

There's only 1 MAJOR flaw in your argument. Money doesn't equal health.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If they die, killed by nature's microbes, that's God taking them back early. They go to heaven. It would be against God if I pay for their healthcare with my money.
edit on 15-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

From your other posts there is a heck of a lot more than just those who can't afford health care that should be omitted.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If they die, killed by nature's microbes, that's God taking them back early. They go to heaven.


There's no proof of god. Using that as an argument is the same as saying anyone shot by a gun deserved it because god didn't stop them.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Health costs money. No drug is free. No doctor is free.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Your responses are sounding more and more trollish.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If they die, killed by nature's microbes, that's God taking them back early. They go to heaven. It would be against God if I pay for their healthcare with my money.


So just to reiterate...
The poor... not the weak?

The rich who are weak can have their healthcare? Right?

And that won't burden society in the same way you've been arguing for 11 pages?



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If they die, killed by nature's microbes, that's God taking them back early. They go to heaven. It would be against God if I pay for their healthcare with my money.


Between god and darwinism, you are a moron, quit while you still have a brain cell.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: TerryDon79

Health costs money. No drug is free. No doctor is free.


So only the poor are unhealthy?

That's some level of ignorance you have there.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye


It would be against God if I pay for their healthcare with my money.


Then your god must be Satan.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Hazardous1408

If they die, killed by nature's microbes, that's God taking them back early. They go to heaven. It would be against God if I pay for their healthcare with my money.


God can go screw himself if he condones this barbarity.

Incidentally this is the argument of someone who knows their beliefs are abhorrent. You know letting sickly children die when it can be stopped is wrong. Therefore you have to rationalise it by saying they go to heaven.

You have serious cognitive dissonance going on here.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Silly. In our for profit system you already do pay for the sick. Very few can afford to self insure. Or do you not understand how our medical insurance system (privatized socialism) works?


Nop. That's up to nature. For every person, there are trillions of bacteria. The weak are killed by nature, not by me. I wouldn't want to pay for someone else's healthcare with my hard earned money. It's not fair.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   
I agree with oanka..don't know why I lose the quote from allsee4eye who I am responding to really firefighters don't change the makeup of socieyt.....they save people all the time how many of these, say are young they are saved by the firefighters, they grow up and they are carrying a recessive trait, they get together with someone else with the same recessive trait and have a baby with severe health problems, or they just happen by the unluck of the draw and their child has bad medical problems.....by your reasoning the firefighters are saving people that should have died before reproducing effecting society




originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Ohanka

Universal healthcare would save people who would otherwise have died or not passed on their genes. Natural selection would have weeded them out because they cannot afford all that money for healthcare by themselves. Over time, there would be more and more people vulnerable to diseases in society, changing the makeup of society and making the taxes required higher and higher. Other social programs like defense, public education, firefighters, garbage collectors do not change the makeup of society and does not require tax rate changes.


You keep repeating this and it just makes you look like a total psychopath.

It is not a good argument.

edit on 15-6-2017 by research100 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-6-2017 by research100 because: added a sentence



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Poor can be strong. Poor can be weak. There is no correlation. The point is, why should people pay for other's healthcare if some people are less vulnerable than others? If would have to be age based. Young receive less and elderly receive more because it is natural elderly need for healthcare than young.
edit on 15-6-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
TO the others in this thread, making very intellectualy honest comments, I do believe that we are dealing with a poster who is mentally ill.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: research100

Fire affect both strong and weak. It don't matter if you are a muscular guy or a weak guy, fire can kill just as well.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   
In the same way that education is supposed to produce productive citizens to take over for the previous generation, pay taxes, do the work and such...Health care should come along with that, with the same intent of producing healthy citizens who are educated well enough to work and be productive and happy.

This may sound ridiculous to a capitalist, but a capitalist specializes in wringing as much work out of employees and machinery as possible without doing any more maintenance than required to anything or anyone in order to protect the bottom line.

Resources are inanimate things to be exploited for profit and many have not even noticed they have been reduced to the same level.

You have been reduced to exploitable resources and you went along with it out of ignorance instilled into your psyche by the best education (indoctrination) system money can buy.

We have been sold all of this technology, all of the more efficient manufacturing methods, transportation methods, etc., yet we still, for some reason are just about as miserable as we could be in our promised utopian paradise promised by the advances in technology and medicine, in social programs and acquisition of knowledge we have a direct hand in creating with the taxes we are forced to pay to fund developing these things.

We have supposedly risen above the level of animals, but we still act the same.

...Animals actually behave better than we do...

Same as always.



posted on Jun, 15 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Poor can be strong. Poor can be weak. There is no correlation. The point is, why should people pay for other's healthcare if some people are less vulnerable than others? If would have to be age based. Young receive less and elderly receive more because it is natural elderly need for healthcare than young.


Why shouldn't you pay? Give me one good reason, not selfish "it's my money" or evil eugenics why there shouldn't be universal healthcare.

Just one will do.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join