i'd like it if we could all allocate where our tax money goes., with certain minimum requirements of course. That way the rah rah America! guys can throw their money at the defense budget while the bleeding hearts can throw their money at welfare and universal health care. Personally I don't really have a problem with taxation. I have a problem with having no say where my money goes and the fact that a good chunk of it goes to complete waste and an inefficient bureaucracy.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Vermont to enact single payer health care plan
Haha, I actually had an idea like that a few years ago. What if, when we filed our taxes, we submitted a little card where we check off the things we wish our money to pay for. Completely impractical of course, but it's a nice direct democracy kind of idea.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
i'd like it if we could all allocate where our tax money goes., with certain minimum requirements of course. That way the rah rah America! guys can throw their money at the defense budget while the bleeding hearts can throw their money at welfare and universal health care. Personally I don't really have a problem with taxation. I have a problem with having no say where my money goes and the fact that a good chunk of it goes to complete waste and an inefficient bureaucracy.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
rats, I agree with this. Oh wellKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
i'd like it if we could all allocate where our tax money goes., with certain minimum requirements of course. That way the rah rah America! guys can throw their money at the defense budget while the bleeding hearts can throw their money at welfare and universal health care. Personally I don't really have a problem with taxation. I have a problem with having no say where my money goes and the fact that a good chunk of it goes to complete waste and an inefficient bureaucracy.
When has anyone (from either side of the aisle) said anyone "doesn't deserve health care"? The argument against Obamacare (and similar single-payer programs) has been that it isn't the responsibility of the Federal government to provide that service, not that people don't deserve it. There is a distinct difference.Macbeth wrote:
I don't see universal health care access as an ethical issue but instead as a practicality issue. It's not a "should we" but "can we" thing. I also don't see the ethical value in the argument coming from some of the right of "not everyone deserves health care".
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
In my state you're fined if you don't have healthcare.Uzique wrote:
great idea, in my opinion. and as you said jay, if it's at the state level - what's the harm to you? as long as the tax-paying people of vermont have a democratic say in the idea and thus can exercise some level of individual 'control' via consensus... it's all fine. as for the rest of the comments (and the topic, generally): i still don't understand why americans are so afraid of universal health-care. i mean, i get the principles and ideologies at stake here... but jesus, it's the 21st century.
In my country the government pays you to get private health care.CC-Marley wrote:
In my state you're fined if you don't have healthcare.Uzique wrote:
great idea, in my opinion. and as you said jay, if it's at the state level - what's the harm to you? as long as the tax-paying people of vermont have a democratic say in the idea and thus can exercise some level of individual 'control' via consensus... it's all fine. as for the rest of the comments (and the topic, generally): i still don't understand why americans are so afraid of universal health-care. i mean, i get the principles and ideologies at stake here... but jesus, it's the 21st century.
Doesn't deserve it based on what? Birth? Color of their skin? Age? Nah.FEOS wrote:
When has anyone (from either side of the aisle) said anyone "doesn't deserve health care"? The argument against Obamacare (and similar single-payer programs) has been that it isn't the responsibility of the Federal government to provide that service, not that people don't deserve it. There is a distinct difference.Macbeth wrote:
I don't see universal health care access as an ethical issue but instead as a practicality issue. It's not a "should we" but "can we" thing. I also don't see the ethical value in the argument coming from some of the right of "not everyone deserves health care".
If someone isn't working they aren't contributing to society and thus don't deserve health care. They're a net loss on society, not a plus. We're simply too nice to those that drag us down instead of doing what is in our logical best interest: cutting bait.
So, if you want to try to make health care affordable to those that are working, sure, absolutely, give it a shot. But to universally state that everyone, no matter the circumstance, deserves both the time of the doctor, and money out of my pocket to pay for it, well, I have a problem with that. Not everyone has value simply because they have a pulse.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Massachusetts, because we're better than you.CC-Marley wrote:
In my state you're fined if you don't have healthcare.Uzique wrote:
great idea, in my opinion. and as you said jay, if it's at the state level - what's the harm to you? as long as the tax-paying people of vermont have a democratic say in the idea and thus can exercise some level of individual 'control' via consensus... it's all fine. as for the rest of the comments (and the topic, generally): i still don't understand why americans are so afraid of universal health-care. i mean, i get the principles and ideologies at stake here... but jesus, it's the 21st century.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
Fucking masshole.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Maryland > MassachusettsUnkleRukus wrote:
Massachusetts, because we're better than you.CC-Marley wrote:
In my state you're fined if you don't have healthcare.Uzique wrote:
great idea, in my opinion. and as you said jay, if it's at the state level - what's the harm to you? as long as the tax-paying people of vermont have a democratic say in the idea and thus can exercise some level of individual 'control' via consensus... it's all fine. as for the rest of the comments (and the topic, generally): i still don't understand why americans are so afraid of universal health-care. i mean, i get the principles and ideologies at stake here... but jesus, it's the 21st century.
Any Western state >
fixt for accuracyHurricane2k9 wrote:
Maryland , Massachusetts
maryland is true paradise
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Vermont to enact single payer health care plan