The price fixing isn’t very pallatable but it is at least worth considering.
What I am saying is that your needs or interest do not justify harming others. Most people feel self sacrifice is the better path than harming other innocent individuals. Most also put a sense of personal responsibility ahead of health.Hmmm, so now you’re saying the un-insurable should buck up and suffer because it’s a ‘personal interest’. And that by doing so they are comparable to the Revolutionary war soldiers marching barefoot in the snow. And if they want coverage they should leave the United States. Or start their own charities.
Royal Archer, I am just curious - do you work in the insurance industry?
I did have kidney stones and I wasn’t thinking about health care, I was praying very intensely though.
Since when did money mean so much that one is physically harmed by having taxes?
I didn’t say “physically” alth though there have been some who were physically harmed or threatened by burtal tax collection methods.
I AM being physically harmed by the lack of preventative care.
That actually overe the last decade is being adressed, and is happening less. Brutal tax collection methods are a matter of an IRS agent trying to get another notch on his post. That happens during times of lower and higher taxes. Whether Democrats or Republicans are in power, so it’s irrelevent to this debate.
If that were the case you would charge the person who is actively doing something to harm you. However,
Most taxes are collected by force or a threat of force. Those who advocate socialized medicine are advocating the use of these violent means in order to achieve their end. That is the entire heart of this thread. Do the ends justify the means?
Well that so called threat of force goes for money for the space program, for foreign aid, to petty dictators, for corporate welfare. I say if we can give money all that purposeless stuff with can direct to something more worthwhile. Take care of our own before we worry about the other periphreal things. As far as the question does the ends justify the means? You seem to advocate it does when its for a business.
So I take it, you are not for good Samaritan laws then? Same principle.
False aguement. I don’t support those things and one wrong does not justify other wrongs. Although the space program does have some constitutional purposes.
It is a fair arguement. Its based on the principle that if one need is satisfied you have to satisfy the other needs. Its called being fair. An arguement thats been around a lot longer than you or I have.
I do not despise anyone.
You do realize that hamstrings you for life, right? I already live in crummy housing and living off of ramen and mac and cheese. I donate platelets every time I can for bus money, what more do you want from me? I have nothing left to shed.
Good thing you are not diebetic. That diet would kill my diebetic wife in no time, and wouldn’t be good for my hypoglycemic mother either.
It runs in the family, so it’s only a matter of time.
a month ago, my wife and I went grocery shopping the friendly neighborhood store where we know everybody that works there. She had postponed eating till after we shopped because she didn’t feel very hungery. In the middle of shopping her sugar crashed big time and one of the clerks got her some orange juice and a candy bar to get the sugar back up. I’m think good thing she had medicare or she could easily been dead by now, and me not knowing of what till the coronor’s report .
That is a silly arguement that since one person is the recipient of illgotten treasures, everyone has the right to do likewise because it it “fair” So if someone robs a bank and gets 2 million dollars then according to this “fairness” aguement everyone should be able to walk in to that bank and get their 2 million also. Obviously that is silly.