Social Security and Medicare are . . . ENTITLEMENTS???

We don't need to get out of healthcare to reform it. Other countries have far lower costs by having cost effective systems and that is the most politically practical alternative to our system whether you like it or not. Conservatives often ignore the threat of income inequality and problems with corporations in the free market and we need reform for this as well.

 

We haven't had free markets since the fed started financializing our economy 100 years ago. But we have had plenty of massive busts, shifting of enormous wealth into the financial sector, war, death and misery

 

If we eliminated the fed, the private market would move into more extreme boom and bust cycles like it did before the fed. The crashes of the great depression and great recession would become common place.

 

Yes and I've repeatedly addressed the points you reiterate in your post.

 

True... but you still don't understand them.
Nobody can make another person believe what they choose to deny. Choices, Kode.

 

This is in response to your post number 213, which did not show up since it appeared in the same box as my post that you were responding to.

But, no matter. . . . Your response, which I assume was meant to be motivational, was more self-aggrandization than logical persuasion. This is particularly less convincing on an anonymous forum. . . . Is the ego genuine, or are you cultivating it???


Luke 18: 9-14

9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

 

Yes, and you deny to the point of irrationality, as I've said in different words. BTW, my disagreement doesn't indicate a failure to understand. In fact, I understand far more than you suspect, about the subject and about your views.

 

The fact is that if you set out to help people become more than they are, you would have to drag most of them kicking and fighting all the way to the future.
IF you know what someone else has accomplished that is similar to what you seek, and you are not an idiot, you should be asking- how is that done?
If you don't know anything about what they seek, why do they find that threatening?

I've asked that question (how did you create this success) of many millionaires, and most have been happy to tell me,. But then, I don't insult them before I ask.
Unfortunately, most people use the facts to belittle others so they don't have to compare themselves to anything that works.

IF I help others improve their lives, I have improved mine as well because I live in the same world. That is my motivation- I keep thinking that if we had a nation of strong people with good values, it would be a better place for everyone. Not mirrors of be, but the best of themselves- and I trust that if such a person learns how to find that, it will most certainly be a good thing. However, if they have no interest in improving their lives or the world we live in... that's a bigger problem, and unfortunately we have a lot of that.

And I am not religious in the biblical sense, so the quotes mean nothing to me. My higher power is not a sky pilot, but a teacher.

 

I guess you're arguing with yourself.
NOT ONE person have I seen anything about killing gramma. Just you.

 

They display a dearth of ability to rationally discuss most anything, or to think things through.

 

I lost ALL respect for you when you stated: "I do not consider their life has meaning or value, and the world best served by ending it."

This goes against ALL the principles of democracy and is the antithesis of equality. It is UNIVERSALLY accepted in this country that all lives are equally important, regardless of social status or financial worth, or even their value to society. . . . Life is so precious that murderers are rarely given the death penalty except in particularly heinous or brutal instances. CIVILIZED societies prefer incarceration, even with its high cost.

I sincerely hope that nobody on this forum shares your perspective; THIS should not be a partisan issue.

I have nothing further to discuss with you.

 

Then, by your standards- Hitler was a valuable person, and perhaps we just needed to turn the other cheek, or understand his pain. Serial killers and mass murderers are valuable too. When you protect the lives of people who destroy other people's lives, protect those who enjoy killing or destroying the lives of others, you destroy good lives in the process. You condemn them by your action, and apparently you don't know the difference in the life you wish to protect and the ones those people would destroy because you protect theirs. And.... you think that is "respecting" life.

You need to rethink what you say you believe; look beyond the biblical quotes to what really happens in the world everyday.

 

He's right. And what he said is very different from the notion that "Hitler was a valuable person". Your thinking is very odd.

 

Spiritglide's failed attempt to distort the narrative using Hitler as an example is obviously out of context when you read post# 213 in its entirety.

Additionally, Hitler was one of the most vocal protractors of "survival of the fittest", with his championing of the "master race" and extermination of Jews.

Mass murderers can HARDLY be compared to those receiving public assistance. There is a difference between being a burden and being a killing machine presenting a demonstrated threat to society.


As an added note, I believe that people in need provide a service by giving others a chance to demonstrate charity and compassion, traits that can be extinguished if not exercised regularly.

 

You should watch some of the political ads liberals make those sort of suggestions everytime the GOP talks reform

 

He said all life is valuable. He not only knows better, he's hypocritical, as most are.

If he had a hamburger for lunch, then he only values the life of a cow for it's flavor- yet the cow only has one life, and it is as valuable to the cow as his life is to him.
He only sees life as valuable when it's his form of life and when the circumstances might include him, because he wants to be think his is valuable without qualification. It's different when it might apply to him, but not important otherwise. Very selective- life is really only valuable to such people when it might affect them.

The value of your life is what YOU make it. It is yours, and totally respected by our laws and society even if you are a bum- until you use it to destroy the lives of others. Then, it becomes a liability to your fellow man, not something to value. When something turns toxic- be it a rotten food, a rabid dog or a deranged killer- it is no longer something to be preserved; it is something to be disposed of. If you don't understand that, you have a problem that will put your valuable life at high risk.

Dennis Rader- Church member and elder in his church. City inspection employee. AKA- the BTK killer; or "Bind, Torture, Kill". Selected victims totally at random while driving around. Watched their patterns, determined when and how to take them. House invasion method typically. First kill, four people. Over time, killed 10. A stone killer- no emotion. I watched his total confession; he remembered every detail down to the look on their faces and how long it took them to die- which he recited as calmly as if he were talking about changing a tire. Because there was not a death penalty applicable at the time, he is max security prison for life. The cost of keeping such a person under those conditions seems to be inconsistent in reports, but looks to be in the range of $140,000 per year- and Rader will probably have 30 years in prison unless some other prisoner kills him or he kill another. Not even accounting for inflation, that means Rader cost the citizens of his state 10 lives, at least 10 million dollars in police investigative and prosecution costs, and another 5 million to keep him taken care of for the rest of his life while minimizing his ability to kill again, which at one point he affirmed he would do if the chance were available. This gross punishment of the innocent of society, being forced to provide for a stone cold serial killer that values nobody's life is justified by saying this man's life has value. There are a great many stories comparable to this one. Others where convicted murderers are released and quickly murder again.

Such people would break into your home, rape and kill your wife and family... and apparently leave you feeling sorry for them?
If you value life, you cannot protect and preserve the people who destroy life of total strangers without cause and still consider yourself a rational, caring person. Having a passion while lacking logic and judgment does not make it a respectable position.

 

You are reading things that were never written?
I DID NOT address people on public assistance or anything of the kind. Compassion for need and plain stupidity are hardly in the same category, and anytime you make a universal statement that "All life is valuable" and express outrage at any qualification, you include people like Hitler and the serial killers that stalk us. YOU include them. This is why I mentioned Hitler- I knew that at least you might be able to identify how his life lacked value to the world, even if you are sympathetic to lesser mass murderers. Apparently, you missed the point again. No surprise.

 

Why do you blame the messenger for the message? First off, yes, SS and Medicare/Medicaid are entitlements to which Americans are entitled because it is taken from our paychecks. And yes again that they are the cause of shortfalls because it is being spent at a rate greater than it is being filled. If this fact isn't addressed, one day, not too far from now, Americans will go to the teat and it will be withered and dry. There will then be nothing for anyone. On top of that, our nation is twenty trillion dollars in debt. And the highest income earners are already taxed at a rate 250 times greater than the lowest income earners. The Democrat solution is higher taxes and deeper in debt. But that in effect is the problem. We are like a drunk in a casino, betting, promising and losing everything for another hour of mindless extravagance.

 

And yet you oppose the idea of the survival of the fittest?
Isn't that how nature works?

 

Funny how you repeat this as if you aren't fully aware of the fact you are wrong.

 

Statistics are easily manipulated to suit the narrative. The lowest income earners pay virtually nothing; what is 250 times nothing?

The bottom line is the difference between the threshold of poverty and massive excess. . . . Employees in our system are paid traditionally the minimum that they will accept to take the job and remain employed, while consumers are bled for the maximum for goods and services that retailers are able to charge and get away with. Hence, the bloated chief executives and major stockholders sit counting their hoarded profits while victims worry about how to meet necessary expenses.

The stock exchange allows massive contributions to enable rapid expansion, which must be reimbursed by the consumer. In order to increase demand for their stock, corporations attempt to minimize operating expenses, which always starts with addressing employee benefits and labor costs. Employees and consumers bear consistently increasing losses in both roles. Unless this negative "trickle down" scenario is corrected, workers and consumers will eventually be unable to support the corporate sector. . . . The solution must entail more effective regulation and/or more equitable taxation.

 

WHAT DO YOU SUPPOSE THIS THREAD IS ABOUT??? If you want to discuss the death penalty for convicted murderers, find or start an appropriate thread.

In post 212 (I thought it was 213) you said NOTHING alluding to mass murderers, but NOW you are saying that you said nothing to rule them out, and you imply that financial assistance was not even part of the conversation. Is it really that I missed the point, or is it just that you keep changing it when you can't defend your arguments???

Deflections don't enhance or justify your point of view; you only challenge your own credibility. . . . When are you going to inject Obama and Hillary into the conversation???

 

Really confused you, I guess....
The entire point is that the value of life varies with what the life does, what we make it to be. Seems you don't agree with that. Your problem, not mine.

 

I support the death penalty for particularly heinous murders or when perpetrators of that crime have no remorse and are a future danger. I do NOT consider indigence to be a crime, and regardless of the reason for it, society is as a collective our "brother's keeper". This is an implied UNCONDITIONAL insurance policy available to any and all citizens, if needed. . . . America is not a jungle.

 

And thus, you oppose nature's 'survival of the fittest'.