Trickle down economics

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesATyler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am looking at these statistics and others and I don’t anything close to universal poverty in America. Americans are still spending like crazy. Over a trillion over the holidays. I’m sorry but America could feed the poor of the world in 30 minutes if it wanted to. It is purely hypocritical to be mad at some rich guy for buying a boat when Americans could end world hunger as easily as blowing a candle out. Truly, America does not care about the poor. They wouldn’t sell their smart phone even if the money could feed a child in Africa for a year.
 
Lots of people are. They just want the fair share paid. If it really only takes 30 B to feed the poor and we spent 1 T over the holidays. Haha. It is hard to take these guys seriously. Americans paid more in sales tax than the cost feed the poor worldwide. Wow
 
JamesATyler said:
Lots of people are. They just want the fair share paid. If it really only takes 30 B to feed the poor and we spent 1 T over the holidays. Haha. It is hard to take these guys seriously. Americans paid more in sales tax than the cost feed the poor worldwide. Wow
Click to expand...
Just because you think the rich should pay more in taxes doesn’t mean you are mad at them. We tax smokers heavily, does that mean we are mad at them? Or does it mean we tax who we can get away with taxing?
 
Lemuel said:
Both

16 characters
Click to expand...
I think the question is - for people like me, who need healthcare to stay functional, and who don’t have the background/experience to just go out and get a job that has healthcare…what’s our option? Because I haven’t exactly been impressed with private charity (especially given the tendency to write anyone who doesn’t have obvious provable symptoms off as a cheat).
 
Everyone needs healthcare, some more than others. So the answer is to let government decide who needs it the most is based on economics? Person A makes a little bit more than Person B, so we will rob Person A, take a huge bite out of it for administration purposes and to pay off the corrupt insurance companies, then give subsidies to Person B, making it impossible for Person A to have possibly life-saving healthcare? Yeah, that sounds totally moral and just. It’s actually nothing more than selfishness and greed.

The government can’t even manage VA healthcare. And we trust them to manage healthcare on a universal basis?

I keep wondering when I’m going to wake up from this comedy/nightmare.
 
Last edited:
My life was already shaping up to be a nightmare trap before ACA - a trap of “you need money to buy healthcare but you need healthcare to get money, but if you want money you haven’t earned you’re selfish and it’s basically a free license for you to put up with abuse and be told you deserve it.” ACA means I actually got a chance to get a job - a chance I almost certainly wouldn’t have had prior to it.

Do you have a solution for people like me?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
If you don’t like it then move.
Click to expand...
Uh huh.

If your marriage is having struggles divorce.

If your kids aren’t behaving kick them out.

If your diet is making you unhealthy don’t eat.

If your job is too challenging quit.

Such an immature way to handle tough issues.
 
Lemuel said:
Uh huh.

If your marriage is having struggles divorce.

If your kids aren’t behaving kick them out.

If your diet is making you unhealthy don’t eat.

If your job is too challenging quit.

Such an immature way to handle tough issues.
Click to expand...
And of course whining about it is the mature way to go?
 
Lemuel said:
Lots of them. Are you suggesting that a corrupt central government is the only solution?
Click to expand...
I’m suggesting I certainly haven’t seen any evidence of greater effectiveness or less corruption when dealing with private charities, so I’d prefer the option where I at least get to vote over the one where I have to cater to the whims of whoever feels like doing something.
 
Lemuel said:
So you’ll gladly use your vote to deny me health care as long as you have yours. I get it.
Click to expand...
And you’ll gladly find things I didn’t actually say to demonize my position, apparently.

The ACA was badly implemented, but there’s no inherent part of universal healthcare that denies your right to have yours. And besides, most of the problem is we had to go with a silly half-private plan rather than just a plain old tax for services. Which would mean everyone gets healthcare.
 
Stronger government regulation to control cost of healthcare.

Why do premiums go on for ever for people who don’t use the insurance? I hear these stories about families paying thousands a month for premiums. If that money built up, they would have enough to cover themselves after a while. Like 200k in the bank. Our health insurance is like term life insurance in principle. I wonder if something like whole health insurance model could work based on the theory that it could be paid up like whole life. Then just pay premiums when it used and to cap it off. Or at least reduced premiums that cover admin and patients with long term, ongoing healthcare costs.

Just wondering.
 
Lemuel said:
Everyone needs healthcare, some more than others. So the answer is to let government decide who needs it the most is based on economics? Person A makes a little bit more than Person B, so we will rob Person A, take a huge bite out of it for administration purposes and to pay off the corrupt insurance companies, then give subsidies to Person B, making it impossible for Person A to have possibly life-saving healthcare?
Click to expand...
As you well know, taxation is not robbing, as robbing means taking something illegitimately, and taxation by a legitimate authority is legitimate and the Catechism tells us we have an obligation to pay taxes.

You also know that the scenario you describe, where a person who earns more money is made poorer than someone who earns less just does not happen. So that makes your scenario a strawman argument.

Also, you have given no evidence that privately-contracted insurance is any less corrupt than government backed insurance.
The government can’t even manage VA healthcare. And we trust them to manage healthcare on a universal basis?
Click to expand...
The VA is a complete health care system. Government backed universal health insurance is not. So comparison with the VA is no apt.
 
Lemuel said:
40.png
DarkLight:
Do you have a solution for people like me?
Click to expand...
Lots of them. Are you suggesting that a corrupt central government is the only solution?
Click to expand...
I noticed you avoided answering DarkLight’s challenge.
 
@LeafByNiggle @Lemuel is famous for that.

He makes baseless assertions or says ridiculous things, then when asked to clarify or describe alternatives he makes snarky one sentence remarks.

Clear signs of someone whose positions are too flimsy to defend.

He apparently also takes a Protestantesque sola Scriptura approach to the Constitution. He doesn’t care what the SCOTUS says about Constitutionality - @Lemuel is the ultimate arbitrator what is Constitutional and what is not.

So just like many sola Scriptura Protestants are their own little Popes, Lemuel is his own little Supreme Court.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top