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.

 

Obama Care, Fascism or Feudalism, you make the call

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   
There are many different forms of Universal Health Coverage ranging from a National Health Insurance to a decentralized non for-profit health insurance subsidized through government. Remember capitalism is a human invention and as such has flaws when these flaws arise I think it is necessary for them to be solved. While people like it or not the only body that has enough power to correct these flaws is our government whether it be Federal, state or local.

When health care is in the hands of government it does lower its innovative and competitive qualities and this needs to be supplemented with subsidies for research and development which should remain strictly in the private sector.

My preferred form of health coverage would not be corporate or government but rather private doctors who receive a mixed plan of private donations, private payments, and government payments. France has implemented perhaps the best system of health care and we should study their model and fix its flaws. What has given the United States a great opportunity over the rest of the world in the health care scenario is that we are the last developed nation without it so we can study all of the other forms and combine what works and what doesn’t.

Overall when done correctly the results would be better, the people healthier, and less payout from the government on health care. I do believe firmly that health care services should not be for-profit as life should not be handled based upon making a profit.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Hey Misoir, do you realize when the price of health care sky rocketed? It was amazingly correlative to the time when Medicare and Medicaid kicked in. It could be only a correlation or it could mean nothing.

All I know is, I do not hire anyone to work on me anymore.

I use to use the system, I had all the coverage. But, times have changed, there are things that we have to understand in the system now. Things that have NOTHING to do with our health care system. Things that are instrumental in the system.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
[
You and the weened masses actually think we want something from the government. This is where we differentiate from you, those of us (true conservatives) want NOTHING from you. So why is it that you have to collect from us? OH that would be because we COST you nothing. We are the types that make you collective society exist.

HOW bout just leaving US alone? Oh, then you collective society would not EXIST. We are learning, do you actually think we are letting you absorb our money anymore? IDIOTS!


Saltheart, Saltheart, Saltheart....

I take a lot of what you say with a grain of salt. You have always struck me as the kind of guy who means well, but who sometimes gets a bit passionate in the heat of battle. But this? This I must comment upon.

The fact of the matter is that the rich profit from the middle class and the poor. Being "self made" is a wonderful and admirable thing. But I do not know of a single "self made" man who didn't earn his wealth other than by commerce with the masses. Collective society makes people wealthy. Why voice such utter contempt for the source of wealth in this world?

And, more over, why would the wealthy feel dirtied or abused when they are asked to pay back into the system that allowed them to become wealthy in the first place?

I've got to say that this one post seems to show a very skewed view of how it all operates. In fact if you owned a company and spoke this way I would do the rational thing and simply refuse to buy your products. I would tell everyone I met not to buy your products and I would show them this post as the impetus for my position.

The fact of the matter is this... One cannot benefit from a system or a society and then condemn the very source of that profit. You seem to want to drink the milk while claiming that the cow is sucking the life out of you all at once. It's just not rational. Taking without wanting to reciprocate in the system that you take from is called theft... something that you constantly rail against.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Pretty good bloviation of actual facts you got going there.

First, you attempt to say that it requires society to create a business, then you attempt to say that business requires the very society that is supposedly preys upon.

Come on, it cannot be both. Either the business coexists or creates. Which is it? I mean society cannot exist without business can it? Or business cannot exist without society. ONE cannot exist without the other.

Please explain the chicken and the egg to me please, I am having a hard time understanding. LOL.
edit on 21-11-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 



Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower

First, you attempt to say that it requires society to create a business, then you attempt to say that business requires the very society that is supposedly preys upon.


Of course it doesn't take a society to create a business. It takes individuals (or groups of them) to do so. But their businesses cannot and will not be viable or profitable without the patronization of society. A store without customers is nothing more than a storage unit. Business does require the very society that it sometimes seeks to prey upon.


Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower

Come on, it cannot be both. Either the business coexists or creates. Which is it? I mean society cannot exist without business can it? Or business cannot exist without society. ONE cannot exist without the other.


Society can exist without businesses. In fact society did so for a very long time before the advent of business Businesses without patronization, however, cannot exist. Society came before business. Society created a need for business.

There is no chicken and egg here at all. Society came before business. People create the potential for business. The beauty is that business, in return, creates potential for people. But when that potential is abused... Well then the system falls apart, much as we've seen in the last decade.

The free market, unchecked, and allowed to abuse it's customer base is irrational. For example, what will Nike do when there's nobody left who can afford their $200.00 sneakers because the only people left with income all work in third world sweat shops?

If the rich don't reinvest in society as well as their own interests, the balance falls apart and nobody wins.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


OK, first a couple of housekeeping items, the first being that MAROON is a dark shade of red, and a MORON is an unintelligent person. When you call someone the former, you end up sounding much like the later...

Secondly, maybe you've heard of this little thing here that the mods love to harp on called the Terms & Conditions. One of the items in the T & C's states:



16) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, libelous, defamatory, hateful, intolerant, bigoted and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.


In other words, you cannot engage in Ad Hominem attacks, which a majority of your posts, including the one I am replying to now, have. If you cannot (or just refuse to) debate this issue like a mature intelligent adult, then just don't reply!

Now onward to the post:


Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


WOWWWWW!

Where will people get the FACTS from people like me.


Good question! If you ever get around to actually stating facts with sources to support supposed facts, we will revisit this question.


I am a Constitutional Libertarian. Do you understand what that means? There is a list of Constitutional authorized components that the federal government is allowed to do.


As to the Constitution, I agree. And it is up to the Supreme Court to decide what is and is not within the purview of the Federal Government, just as the Constitution states. As to what you are politically:


Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
...those of us (true conservatives) want NOTHING from you...


So which are you? Are you a Conservative (true or otherwise)? Or are you a Constitutional Libertarian? They are NOT the same!


NOW, YOU and people LIKE YOU authorize our government to act JUST LIKE THE NAZIS!


If that were true, you would already be in an internment camp. And I don't authorize the Government to act in any way. They have yet to get my authorization on anything, just for the record.


Do you understand that? Or are you just a MAROON?


I think we already covered this one earlier...


What gives the US government the RIGHT to dictate ANYTHING in any other government?


Please give source material where the US Government has dictated how another government functions or acts... If that statement where true, then North Korea and Iran would NOT be on the verge of being Nuclear Powers...


Why don't you tell me that mr know it all.


I think I just did...



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Please INFORM me where IN THE CONSTITUTION that it authorizes the takeover of the health care business.

Ereugo-www.constitutionallibertarian.co.cc... -ponint to the part where the government can takeover an industry.

Next, point to the part where the government has the authorization to do pretty much 90% of what they do. GET RIGHT ON IT alright.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Well the Constitution does have it that mail delivery is taken over. What about that?

It doesn't mean you can't have private businesses compete with the government but rather the government does manage the overall system with any extras taken care of by private corporations.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 11/21/2010 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Show me where the Supreme Court has said otherwise... Either that or stop your whining and DO SOMETHING! We have a court system here just for that purpose! File suit against the US Government and get it taken up to the Supreme Court!

And no where did I say Jack about whether or not it was Constitutional! I just said that it would be the mark of an advanced and civilized society.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
[more]

No
No
No
No
Society CANNOT exist without business. Do you even understand what business is? My neighbor needed a new driveway, did we need government to implement that? Of course not, he needed a new slab. Did government pay for it? Of course not, he paid for it himself. NOW in France or England, the government would have had to okay this, or the government would have had to be consulted because the government is involved in everything, WTF!!!!!!

That is NOT the US. Are you looking forward to allowing the government to address EVERY single thing we do?

Idiocy!



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


If your neighbor needed a new driveway, he would need to get a building permit from the local government. And without a Government to plan and have roads, highways and bridges built, his car would never be able to leave his new driveway anyway...



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


You might want to pick up a book and study anything that happened before about 2500 years ago... Or study any rural cultures, a couple of which are still extant... which all managed to thrive without business, free markets, or anything we would call an economy.

The world did not begin with a 7-11 that then grew employees... It began with people who had ideas that led to the building of the 7-11.

Society does, indeed, predate business and, therefore, existed without it.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
The job of the prez is twofold:

1) Unleash the dogs, for the banks that we owe a debt to. e.g. - IMF
2) Serve the corporations. e.g. - govt, oil, defense, food, water, shelter, tech, etc;

Citizens are only here to feed both.

Peace



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 




Were do you live? You do NOT need a permit or building permit to replace a driveway, or even to install one, unless you want to change the size of the entrance to the driveway.

See, this is the problem with people like you, you THINK you know the law and you DO NOT know it. If you do not change the footprint of your home, you do not need to get ANYTHING from the government. Even if you did change the home situation, what BUSINESS is it of the government? Oh, so they can increase your taxes?

Idiocy!



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 




Two people met, one gave the other a cup of coffee, the other gave him a nod, business was established. No, society does NOT exist without business. Business is the establishment of society.

Society does NOT exist without business. Business can exist without society. As a traveler can conduct business without society being intertwined.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


What, you are going to just ignore my reply to you??



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


From the Wiki, regarding society (because I like to read when I post to make sure of stuff)


TexA society or a human society is (1) a group of people related to each other through persistent relations such as social status, roles and social networks. (2) A large social grouping that shares the same geographical territory and is subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. Human societies are characterized by patterns of relationships between individuals sharing a distinctive culture and institutions. Without an article, the term refers either to the entirety of humanity or a contextually specific subset of people.

Used in the sense of an association, a society is a body of individuals outlined by the bounds of functional interdependence, possibly comprising characteristics such as national or cultural identity, social solidarity, language or hierarchical organization.


I suppose the concept of business could be shoved into that... but it's not explicitly stated or necessary. But then I came to paragraph three...


Like other groupings, a society allows its members to achieve needs or wishes they could not fulfill alone; the social fact can be identified, understood or specified within a circumstance that certain resources, objectives, requirements or results, are needed and utilized in an individual manner and for individual ends, although they can't be achieved, gotten or fulfilled in an individual manner as well, but, on the contrary, they can be gotten only in a collective, collaborative manner; namely, team work becomes the valid functional means, to individual ends which an individual would need to have but isn't able to get.


Uh oh.... So... Do you want to go ahead and change your label of what you want into "anti-society" now, or do I need to break out some more Wiki?


~Heff



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


I have never argued against the legitimate components of the relegated authorities of the Constitution.
Of course, once the private components in society have made certain components irrelevant, maybe we should look at that. This year, the post office lost 8 BILLION dollars! They have a MONOPOLY and still lost $8 Billion!!!!! How long do we continue the idiocy? Is it truly about the mail or is it about control? Yes, a mail system is important, but one has to look at new technology. Of course, what would happen if the system failed?

We do have to think ahead and strategically.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Did it ever occur to you that local ordinances vary from place to place? Or did you just ASS-u-me that everywhere was just like where you live? And is it really necessary to call people idiots in every post? Are you really that small and shallow minded?

Also, you seem to like to avoid 99% of the posts put to you. You completely ignored the part about roads, highways and bridges. But then again, that is because you cannot dispute this. Your position is weak and tenuous, but you seem to think that calling people idiots and throwing Straw Men at the argument will negate that... It will not...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join