Entitlement mentality

[Rob Roy]

so are you saying no one should ever pay any taxes ????

To answer your question.
Nobody should use force to extort from another. That's what government does. Do you deny this?
If you do deny this, kindly rise to the challenge and define the word "ownership"?

Should something a person "owns" (their home) automatically and against their will be pledged to the government as collateral for property taxes/school funding? How is that NOT extortion?

People that don't use or want something should not be forced to pay for it. Can you stay on topic long enough to refute the dirty little secret that public education funds are extorted from home owners in the truest definition of the word extortion? I'm betting you can't.

You are free to join forces and create collectives with other people voluntarily in MY world, but I am not free not to participate in your world am I? Your world relies on government force to MAKE others comply, mine doesn't.

Your world doesn't let ME decide what's best for ME does it? Your world is based on the rumor of freeddom, but the reality of controlling others.

 

[Rob Roy]

If you don't like paying taxes . . .

- Don't drive on paved streets or highways.
- Don't call 911.
- Don't flush your toilet.
- Don't bring your garbage to the curb.
- Don't fly in an airplane that uses air-traffic controllers.
- Don't use the court system.
- Don't call the police when you get robbed.
- Don't use the US Post Office, send all your letters via FedEx or UPS.
- Don't ask for a farm subsidy for not growing crops.
- Don't ask for a taxpayer subsidy to do business in a city or state.
- Don't buy a sports franchise and ask the taxpayers to build your stadium.
- Don't send your children to public schools.
- Don't attend a state university.
- Don't expect a social security payment.
- Don't let Medicare pay your bills if you are over 65 or disabled.
- Don't look for a government contract to bolster your defense industry business.
- Don't look for a government.
- Don't look for a lucrative government consultant contract.
- Don't run for political office where your salary is paid for by the taxpayers.
- Don't accept government research findings that subsidize research for your industry.
- Don't be an airline and expect the government to bail you out.
- Don't be a car company and expect the government to bail you out.
- Don't be a steel company and expect the government to bail you out.
- Don't be a company that pollutes and expect the taxpayer to bail you out.
- Don't climb to the top of the Washington Monument, which is maintained at taxpayer expense.
- Don't make use of police services.
- Don't be rescued by fire department paramedic team.
- Don't call the fire department.
- Don't expect federal assistance if a natural disaster destroys your home or business.
- Don't expect the military to defend your country.
- Don't visit national parks or hike in national forests.
- Don't eat USDA inspected meat, cheese, eggs or produce.
- Don't take any medications tested and approved by the FDA.
- Don't drink, bath or otherwise use the water from municipal water systems.
- Don't look at or relay a weather report.
- Don't look at a NASA generated picture.
- Don't expect a unit of measure like a gallon of gas to be a full gallon.
- Don't expect an elevator to work correctly or not fall.
- Don't expect a red light to work.
- Don't be the Minority Senate Leader Named Trent Lott and expect American taxpayers to subsidize the building of private industry cruiseliner ships in your home state.
- Don't accept government money to help develop a product which you then personally patent or copyright and sell for your own profit.
- Don't use the services of a doctor who is licensed through the state.
- Don't expect research into medical problems such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, aging, prostrate, menopause, etc.
- Don't use the public library.
- Don't go to a state university affiliated hospital.
- Don't go to a state university.
- Don't watch state college sports.
- Don't apply for government grants.
- Don't use your state's convention centers.
- Don't go to a state, city or municipal-run airport.
- Don't ask for rural electrification.
- Don't ask for FEC regulations that protect us from crooked financial planners.
- Don't ask to keep the airwaves free so your right-wing psycho radio talk show host can lie to you.
- Don't ask for a business loan from the small business administration.
- Don't ask to use the G.I. bill to go to college.
- Don't allow Al Gore to sponsor legislation to turn a military computer network (DARPANet/ARPANet) into the public-accessed "Internet."
- Don't drive a car that benefits from government safety regulations.
- Don't use electricity generated by TVA or some government-owned and maintained dam or facility.
- Don't use currency printed by the US Treasury.​

- Don't use a bank or credit union that insures your deposits through the FDIC.​

- Don't buy or build a house that requires the efforts of county deed offices or needs building permits and inspections.​

- Don't get married, have children or die and expect the government to keep track of all the certificates.
- Don't expect the government to keep an eye on cemeteries, crematories and funeral homes so you won't get dug up and thrown in a swamp. And ask George Bush why he lied about his involvement with a company that did just that.​

- Don't run for an elected office, because the local, state and federal election commissions could be involved.
- Don't go to a beach kept clean by the state.
- Don't use public transportation.
- Don't visit public museums.
- Don't go hunting, fishing, or camping on government property.
- Don't cross a bridge.
- Don't use truckstops or public restrooms.
- Don't expect the government to protect the copyright for the works you create.
- Don't move to any other developed nation, because the taxes are higher in all
the others, except South Africa.
- Don't expect your tap water to be clean and germ free.
- Don't expect there to be much wildlife left other than rats.
- Don't use wood or eat meat grown on Forest Service or BLM land.
- Don't eat any food transported on roads.
- Don't eat any vegetables in winter, 'cause they're mostly grown with "reclaimed" water.
- Don't expect any workplace safety standards, labor laws, or minimum wage.
- Don't use any gasoline, oil, or natural gas that was discovered by the USGS.
- Don't live in New Orleans, Sacramento or any other city protected by a levee.
- Don't expect zoning laws.
- Don't expect clean air, clean water, clean soil, etc.
- Don't expect highway signs.
- Don't expect laws against murder, theft, etc. (the govt. DEFINES crime).
- Don't expect to OWN anything, like your house, car, etc. (the govt. keeps track
of titles).
- Don't expect anyone to plow your roads when it snows or sweep them when they're dirty.
- Don't expect the government to regulate industries that have monopolies and use that power to raise your rates for reduced service and product quality.
- Don't expect the government to keep gasoline rates low, compared to the rest of the world.
- Don't expect convicted criminals to be in prison and off your street.
- Don't expect the local government to condemn private property at below market rates so that your major league baseball franchise can build a stadium on the land and make millions of dollars in profit while leaving the taxpayers to foot the bill when the courts order the government to pay the property owners a fair price.
- Don't expect to receive a cheap land lease on Federal lands, then mine or cut the forest for your profit with no repayment to the landlord (we the people).
- Don't expect to have uniform building codes.
- Don't expect to go to buildings and high rises that have been reviewed and inspected during construction to ensure it was built to current building codes.
- Don't expect to eat in restaurants that have been inspected to ensure cleanliness and the safe preparation of food.
- Don't expect your children to be able to ride the bus to school.
- Don't try to adopt a child through your county or state government.
- Don't expect the state or county to pay foster parents to take care of the children left abandoned or orphaned.
- Don't expect the state or county to investigate and/or remove children from neglectful or abusive homes.
- Don't visit the Smithsonian.
- Don't write any material to be published and copyright it.
- Don't go to your book store and try to find a book by its ISBN number.
- Don't expect the government to stop the auto companies from building SUVs that roll over and kill your wife and kids.
- Don't expect the court to appoint a taxpayer-paid attorney to represent you (or your child) when you are accused of a crime.
- Don't call or go to the US Embassy in a foreign country when you get in trouble.

- Don't get a passport or try to get out of the US without a Passport.​

Ahem, you forgot killing people in foreign countries under the guise of "protecting me" I don't expect much from the government and would gladly release them from any obligations if they would simply leave me the fuck alone.
Oh wait, THEY won't do that, because I'm a "subject".


Your long list further demonstrates my point that in order to fund all the bullshit you list above they insist on extorting
to justify their existence. There is nothing about government that is voluntary or promotes freedom.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair.

 

[CrackerJax]

Well, we seem to have three groups of ppl here.

1.) ppl who think the taxes are just fine and dandy, keep'em coming.
2.) ppl who feel taxes are necessary in the right proportion, and if the money is not wasted.
3.) ppl who don't think taxes are "legal" and the individual citizen should opt out if he/she wishes to, at least on "some" taxes.

The correct answer of course... is number 2. Just like Goldilocks.

The #1 folks seem blissfully unaware of the massive waste in the tax system, which is no surprise. These ppl typically pay the least amount of taxes, which gives sway to the positive outlook since they gather more than they spill.

With #2, at least some of them, folks see taxes as a plus for general services, but hate to see the govt. inflate itself into tax areas in which it has no constitutional basis doing. This category pays much more in taxes, and their concern rises as the waste is quite evident. ( #1 doesn't see waste, or doesn't care)


#3 is against the taxation principle in its essence. They see most taxes unconstitutional (they may be right), and are the most cost conscience. They see that the govt. has broken its pact with the citizens and is off spending on things they have no right to.

Obama is destroying Welfare reform. Not a friend to the poor. Willing to trade ppl's economic futures for his parties gain in votes.

Welfare is just like heroin. Once on it, the numbers say you probably won't leave it till ur dead.

It's a poverty ponzi scheme designed to keep the poor in line.

 

[Rob Roy]

The constitution is an interesting document and if followed would be a big step towards freedom versus the state of affairs that presently exist. However even the Constitution has it's flaws. Nobody alive today signed it, did they?

For instance how can one person or body of persons commit another person to a specific behavior? The essence of freedom is the reciprocity it provides. I don't own you, you don't own me. I cannot make a commitment for another, nor do I accept others making a commitment for me. As long as a person leaves others alone SHOULD they be bound to behave in any way or pay extortion to a government they may disagree with?

People fall into sayings such as "that's just the way it is" ....while failing to acknowledge the true meaning of freedom is that it is not granted to us, it is inalienabe. If freedom is inalienable, where does the power to tax come from if not from
unethical and immoral and forceful means? Anybody?

Bottom line most problems arise when one person attempts to control another. These problems are multiplied when trying to control others by rationalizing that if a majority or the most powerful group (government) says something is so, that it is so. In many cases might does not make right, it only steals freedom.

Most people believe without a coercive government there will be chaos. This is flawed, government has caused most of the chaos in the world. As an example - war. Have a group of friends over for dinner, is it civil? Was government there to MAKE you be civil or did responsible adults simply act that way without being forced to?

 

[londonfog]

Ahem, you forgot killing people in foreign countries under the guise of "protecting me" I don't expect much from the government and would gladly release them from any obligations if they would simply leave me the fuck alone.
Oh wait, THEY won't do that, because I'm a "subject".


Your long list further demonstrates my point that in order to fund all the bullshit you list above they insist on extorting
to justify their existence. There is nothing about government that is voluntary or promotes freedom.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair.

sorry guy you got me all confused ???? are you saying you don't want taxes or goverment ????

 

[londonfog]

Well, we seem to have three groups of ppl here.

1.) ppl who think the taxes are just fine and dandy, keep'em coming.
2.) ppl who feel taxes are necessary in the right proportion, and if the money is not wasted.
3.) ppl who don't think taxes are "legal" and the individual citizen should opt out if he/she wishes to, at least on "some" taxes.

The correct answer of course... is number 2. Just like Goldilocks.

The #1 folks seem blissfully unaware of the massive waste in the tax system, which is no surprise. These ppl typically pay the least amount of taxes, which gives sway to the positive outlook since they gather more than they spill.

With #2, at least some of them, folks see taxes as a plus for general services, but hate to see the govt. inflate itself into tax areas in which it has no constitutional basis doing. This category pays much more in taxes, and their concern rises as the waste is quite evident. ( #1 doesn't see waste, or doesn't care)


#3 is against the taxation principle in its essence. They see most taxes unconstitutional (they may be right), and are the most cost conscience. They see that the govt. has broken its pact with the citizens and is off spending on things they have no right to.

Obama is destroying Welfare reform. Not a friend to the poor. Willing to trade ppl's economic futures for his parties gain in votes.

Welfare is just like heroin. Once on it, the numbers say you probably won't leave it till ur dead.

It's a poverty ponzi scheme designed to keep the poor in line.

dont think anyone thinks number one is good...unless you speaking about yourself

 

[doobnVA]

Another reason to advocate for more home schooling and dismantle the financial strangehold of "Public education".'

A very small portion of our overall federal spending actually goes to funding primary and secondary education. There is no "financial stranglehold" caused by public school funding. Public schools are funded mainly by the residents of your state with state and local taxes.

While I do advocate homeschooling, I think it's also important there be some sort of standard. Teachers are (for the most part, there are some exceptions to this as we've probably all encountered at least one "wingnut" teacher in our lifetimes) well qualified to perform the task of educating children, and are aware of such standards and truly desire to instill a love for learning in their pupils (what other reason, besides summers off, is there to become a teacher? It doesn't even pay particularly well by any stretch of the imagination).

We know that all parents are not qualified to be teachers. Parents who can't be bothered to exchange words with their child's teacher or take an active role in their public education are obviously not going to be able to handle the role of sole-provider-of-academia. After all, if they really thought the public school system is that bad, why do they send their precious children there in the first place?

Since we live in a world where the cost of living seems to be always rising, the stay-at-home parent is a dwindling commodity. The vast majority of households are becoming double breadwinner households, and this leaves parents with few options. Child care is expensive. A private daycare facility charges anywhere from $200-infinity dollars per week, per child. Private school tuition is equally out of reach for many, and with some exceptions, the curriculum is laid out by the state and very closely resembles that of the public schools. Since working outside the home is not a choice but a necessity for many parents, leaving the workforce and staying home to school a child would be crippling, or even ruinous, financially.

I appreciate your commitment to the position that "big government is bad", but in the case of education in particular - there is no basis for blaming the federal government, the local governments, or anyone other than lazy, uninvolved parents.

 

[Rob Roy]

sorry guy you got me all confused ???? are you saying you don't want taxes or goverment ????

They are not for me. If they are for you, are you willing to advocate force to make me participate?

 

[CrackerJax]

I think I covered that in Number 2. Ppl who don't mind paying, but can't stand to see it wasted and expanded into unconstitutional areas.

 

[doobnVA]

that's all fine and dandy if they are transferring actual information to their students that could be used in real life. so much of that information has become opinion and indoctrination that it is as much mental masturbation as is posting on these boards. institutions have sprung up whose sole purpose is creating these indoctrination automatons to populate our houses of so-called higher learning. so much of what is fed to gullible students is conjecture and innuendo, based on nothing more than ivory tower philosophy. at a time when those young minds should be exploring all facets of life and the multitude of philosophies that our world contains, they are all too often being implanted with the agenda of the same liberal establishment that will later seek to enslave them and instilled with a disgust for the very society they should be learning to enhance. anything of value they may learn is often offset by that disgust and any use they may become to a free society contaminated by that flawed agenda.



wow, that was fun. can you tell i have a bit of a problem with the ivory tower crowd?

Spoken like someone who has never been to college, and has some sort of grudge against those who do. If you're trying to justify your personal decision not to pursue a higher education by insulting the entire institute that is higher education, I can empathize with you there. I almost convinced myself that I didn't really need to go to college to be successful, too. Almost.

In my early twenties, I would look around me and see that my "peers" who were college students were largely without common sense, life experience, and basically any knowledge that wasn't contained inside their precious textbooks. As I begun to dig deeper into this phenomena I realized that this mentality was not created by the colleges and universities, it began at home, with their parents. These kids never worked and earned a paycheck, and they weren't shouldering the cost of tuition, books, and paying their own rent and buying groceries. These kids were still living off their parents, playing the role of "good student" while charging kegs of beer to Mommy and Daddy's credit cards.

As I've gotten older and now that I, myself, am pursuing a higher education, I've come to realize that these kids are in no way representative of college students as a whole and are actually a pretty small sub-section of the student population.

I don't know what you mean by "indoctrination". Students in a classroom are always encouraged to raise questions about the material that's presented to them.

 

[doobnVA]

They are not for me. If they are for you, are you willing to advocate force to make me participate?

If you don't want to participate, you don't have to live here. But like someone else said, don't expect to be able to leave without producing your government-issued, taxpayer funded passport. Since you don't think you should pay taxes, though, I don't think you should be able to get a passport. Put in a call to your local vital records department and have them shred your birth certificate, since it's tax dollars that allow them to keep a record of it for you. Turn over any copies of birth certificates and your social security card (since those are issued by the government and paid for with tax money).

The only solution: The death penalty.

Taxpayers aren't going to support your non-taxpaying ass while you sit in prison for not paying taxes.

 

[Rob Roy]

A very small portion of our overall federal spending actually goes to funding primary and secondary education. There is no "financial stranglehold" caused by public school funding. Public schools are funded mainly by the residents of your state with state and local taxes.

While I do advocate homeschooling, I think it's also important there be some sort of standard. Teachers are (for the most part, there are some exceptions to this as we've probably all encountered at least one "wingnut" teacher in our lifetimes) well qualified to perform the task of educating children, and are aware of such standards and truly desire to instill a love for learning in their pupils (what other reason, besides summers off, is there to become a teacher? It doesn't even pay particularly well by any stretch of the imagination).

We know that all parents are not qualified to be teachers. Parents who can't be bothered to exchange words with their child's teacher or take an active role in their public education are obviously not going to be able to handle the role of sole-provider-of-academia. After all, if they really thought the public school system is that bad, why do they send their precious children there in the first place?

Since we live in a world where the cost of living seems to be always rising, the stay-at-home parent is a dwindling commodity. The vast majority of households are becoming double breadwinner households, and this leaves parents with few options. Child care is expensive. A private daycare facility charges anywhere from $200-infinity dollars per week, per child. Private school tuition is equally out of reach for many, and with some exceptions, the curriculum is laid out by the state and very closely resembles that of the public schools. Since working outside the home is not a choice but a necessity for many parents, leaving the workforce and staying home to school a child would be crippling, or even ruinous, financially.

I appreciate your commitment to the position that "big government is bad", but in the case of education in particular - there is no basis for blaming the federal government, the local governments, or anyone other than lazy, uninvolved parents.

You miss my point. Where is the moral basis to insist that I pay for something I don't want or don't use?

You deny the reality that Public schools ARE funded by extortion. You are incorrect. Extortion...look it up. It is unauthorized taking using the threat of force or punishment. That's EXACTLY how schools are funded. There IS only one "choice" pay up or lose your house.
That's not freedom. That's force.


So tell me how MY taxes are extracted. They aren't given voluntarily, they are taken under duress, if I don't pay what will happen to my house?

What gives you or anyone the moral authority to decide what I will do with my property? Do I even own it, if it is collateral for YOUR wishes or programs?

You seem worried about the costs of things...what if you kept ALL of your paycheck and the Federal Reserve shenanigans hadn't inflated the currency so much a parent could stay home? Oh wait can't do that, then all the do nothing bureacrats wouldn't have jobs and you'd be free.

There is nothing wrong with school cooperatives, if you prefer not to stay home, as long as nobody is FORCED to belong or pay. Agreed?

 

[londonfog]

Rob Roy I missed your point entirely... so you don't like taxes and you hate goverment..is that about right

 

[RickWhite]

There are two types of professors. One has made a career of either going to, or teaching school. The other kind has gone to school, graduated and become successful in life. Then they go back to teach others.

It is usually in the sciences or business that has the second type. They are a small minority overall.

Most professors only know the paper side of things.

Getting back on topic, CrackerJax said it here. When I was a molecular biology major nearly all of my science and math professors were Conservative and nearly all of my liberal arts professors were Liberal. I took many classes that taught no facts at all, just Left wing opinion and ideology that can not be substantiated. They would tell us they are teaching "how to think." I would think to myself, "so I'm supposed to formulate opinions without anything backing them - that is how to think? Sound like a lesson in how not to think."

Anyway, it is my experience that hard science professors do have actual work experience while liberal arts professors do not. After all, in what field does one with a degree in Women's studies work?

I remember distinctly taking an intro anthropology course in which the stated goal of the course was to dispel the notion that the history of man has any type of linear progress and therefore it is wrong to believe that a given culture can be more advanced than another. Advancement, they claim, requires a start point and a goal and because there is no one goal in life no culture can be seen as being closer to the goal or to the beginning. I played along and got an A in the class but I still find the assertion humorous. I guess the fact that we live to 75 or 80 and they live to 40 doesn't prove anything - whatever you say.

On another note, I do feel that a general social safety net is a good idea - you never know when you may need help. However, allowing people to remain Dependant forever isn't good. And there are better alternatives when dealing with the poor. Israel has a system of farming communes called Kibbutz that people can live on as long as they wish. Some kids live there for a while just for fun, while others stay their entire life. They do make you work and they are highly productive producing some of the best fruit in the world. There is also workfare in which people can be assigned jobs according to their ability. Why shouldn't a young able bodied woman who needs assistance be assigned to care for the elderly instead of giving her money and paying more to a care giver? If people can't buy food how about having them work in a community farm producing that food? The alternatives go on and on.

At any rate, this thread isn't about how to help the poor. This thread is about how promoting a mentality of entitlement keeps the poor poor. I know as an employer that I would not hire someone who felt entitled to a living or that their problems were everyone else's fault.

 

[2much]

if you dont like the job quit. if you dont like the employee fire em'. but whining wont help.wtf? this aint craigslist.

 

[Rob Roy]

If you don't want to participate, you don't have to live here. But like someone else said, don't expect to be able to leave without producing your government-issued, taxpayer funded passport. Since you don't think you should pay taxes, though, I don't think you should be able to get a passport. Put in a call to your local vital records department and have them shred your birth certificate, since it's tax dollars that allow them to keep a record of it for you. Turn over any copies of birth certificates and your social security card (since those are issued by the government and paid for with tax money).

The only solution: The death penalty.

Taxpayers aren't going to support your non-taxpaying ass while you sit in prison for not paying taxes.

"If you don't want to participate you don't have to live here"...that's collectivist thought and intellectually weak, I'm betting you can do better than that.

Would you REALLY put a person who harms nobody in prison or kill them? Hmm, you validate my point that government is first and foremost force. Do you really support that? You can do better than that...think.

So applying your logic that the state owns my decisions and can decide what
I will pay for even if I harm nobody and
do not request certain uh "services"...
...I will assume you (like many others) will now do a flipflop of logic and declare that you own your body and have the right to smoke pot? Where is your moral consistency? If you own your body and smoking pot is a personal choice, shouldn't you own your labor and decisions about YOUR property? Shouldn't I? Shouldn't everyone as long as they harm nobody?

You would be free to make your own choices in my world...yet I wouldn't in yours?

So again, Do you really advocate the death penalty for all who maintain they should be free to make their own choices?

 

[doobnVA]

I remember distinctly taking an intro anthropology course in which the stated goal of the course was to dispel the notion that the history of man has any type of linear progress and therefore it is wrong to believe that a given culture can be more advanced than another. Advancement, they claim, requires a start point and a goal and because there is no one goal in life no culture can be seen as being closer to the goal or to the beginning. I played along and got an A in the class but I still find the assertion humorous. I guess the fact that we live to 75 or 80 and they live to 40 doesn't prove anything - whatever you say.

Since anthropology is a study of cultural, social, or biological influences on humanity - "advancement" socially and culturally has little to do with advancement of technology, industrially, or economically.

Not surprising that these things would go right over your head, since you seem to equate the term "liberal arts" with liberalism as it applies to politics.

Length of life also has little to do with where we are culturally, and more to do with the fact that we have advanced industry, technology, and highly trained medical professionals. These things exist outside the scope of the study of anthropology, and are more in line with studies of economics or sociology.

 

[RickWhite]

You miss my point. Where is the moral basis to insist that I pay for something I don't want or don't use?

You deny the reality that Public schools ARE funded by extortion. You are incorrect. Extortion...look it up. It is unauthorized taking using the threat of force or punishment. That's EXACTLY how schools are funded. There IS only one "choice" pay up or lose your house.
That's not freedom. That's force.


So tell me how MY taxes are extracted. They aren't given voluntarily, they are taken under duress, if I don't pay what will happen to my house?

What gives you or anyone the moral authority to decide what I will do with my property? Do I even own it, if it is collateral for YOUR wishes or programs?

You seem worried about the costs of things...what if you kept ALL of your paycheck and the Federal Reserve shenanigans hadn't inflated the currency so much a parent could stay home? Oh wait can't do that, then all the do nothing bureacrats wouldn't have jobs and you'd be free.

There is nothing wrong with school cooperatives, if you prefer not to stay home, as long as nobody is FORCED to belong or pay. Agreed?

I get what you are saying and I agree in principle but in fairness you have to consider the following.

While much of where we are in life is a product of our decisions, life is to some extent affected by external sources. Now consider for a moment a social insurance policy contracted prior to our birth that says that everyone will pool together a reasonable sum for the purpose of generating a modest safety net that we all have equal potential for needing.

This insurance would never be possible if we all got to wait to see if we need it or not before choosing to participate. When you look at it this way it makes good sense to have something like this in case any of us wind up drawing the short straw.

Now where I agree with you is when you get into permanent subsidy of people's entire existence. Especially, when there is no plan to get them onto their feet but instead to continuously rob Peter to pay Paul.

In the former case you do have to pony up because on the day you were born you began receiving the protection of the safety net. Think of being in a horrible car crash and waking up in ICU. You didn't agree to pay the hospital but you still owe the money because it is reasonable for them to presume a contract given the circumstances. Now on the other hand if you decided to take up residence in a hospital room that would be an entirely different story.

In closing I think it is reasonable to provide a short term safety net for those in need. But I stop short of saying that I have to pay for another man's health care because he insists on making a mess of his life like so many do.

 

[doobnVA]

"If you don't want to participate you don't have to live here"...that's collectivist thought and intellectually weak, I'm betting you can do better than that.

Would you REALLY put a person who harms nobody in prison or kill them? Hmm, you validate my point that government is first and foremost force. Do you really support that? You can do better than that...think.

So applying your logic that the state owns my decisions and can decide what
I will pay for even if I harm nobody and
do not request certain uh "services"...
...I will assume you (like many others) will now do a flipflop of logic and declare that you own your body and have the right to smoke pot? Where is your moral consistency? If you own your body and smoking pot is a personal choice, shouldn't you own your labor and decisions about YOUR property? Shouldn't I? Shouldn't everyone as long as they harm nobody?

You would be free to make your own choices in my world...yet I wouldn't in yours?

So again, Do you really advocate the death penalty for all who maintain they should be free to make their own choices?

You ARE free to make your own choices. However, if you want to make those choices within the United States, then you must follow the same rules as the rest of us.

It's like Mom and Dad always say "As long as you live under MY roof, you follow MY rules".

Don't like it? Get a place of your own.

Freedom is not the same thing as anarchy.

Like I tell my kids when they gripe about having to do chores, Being part of a family means pitching in, even when it isn't your mess.

Strike family and replace it with "society", and the moral of the story holds true.

Don't want to be a member of society? Fine, then get the fuck out. See how much you really like it out on your own.

 

[doobnVA]

I get what you are saying and I agree in principle but in fairness you have to consider the following.

While much of where we are in life is a product of our decisions, life is to some extent affected by external sources. Now consider for a moment a social insurance policy contracted prior to our birth that says that everyone will pool together a reasonable sum for the purpose of generating a modest safety net that we all have equal potential for needing.

This insurance would never be possible if we all got to wait to see if we need it or not before choosing to participate. When you look at it this way it makes good sense to have something like this in case any of us wind up drawing the short straw.

Now where I agree with you is when you get into permanent subsidy of people's entire existence. Especially, when there is no plan to get them onto their feet but instead to continuously rob Peter to pay Paul.

In the former case you do have to pony up because on the day you were born you began receiving the protection of the safety net. Think of being in a horrible car crash and waking up in ICU. You didn't agree to pay the hospital but you still owe the money because it is reasonable for them to presume a contract given the circumstances. Now on the other hand if you decided to take up residence in a hospital room that would be an entirely different story.

In closing I think it is reasonable to provide a short term safety net for those in need. But I stop short of saying that I have to pay for another man's health care because he insists on making a mess of his life like so many do.

You just made a hell of an argument IN FAVOR of universal health insurance, probably without even realizing it.