simple question

[4est_4est_Gump]

I'm a half-breed too. Big whoop. Do you like me better now?


Probably not but you're no better than I am and I'm no better than Ish is. We are all equal, at least on this site. I'd believe in the real world too which is what trips up you and Ish too.

If you used to be as poor as you claim and yet you're still referring to people below the poverty line as "those people" is why it's hard to give any credence to your argument.

I do not like, or dislike, you.

What I dislike is the personalized and fallacious manner in which you are trying to make your points. It's like talking to a smug, self-righteous teenager.

 

[Wings]

All it takes is one accident, one illness, one unfortunate incident to make us all poor, alone, maybe dying and in need of relief. Money doesn't guarantee care givers, family doesn't guarantee caregivers, compassionate friends don't guarantee caregivers. That's why we have social programs. Do I think it should be free, no. Do I think it can be fee based, maybe. I hate how our elderly are treated these days, their entire life savings sunk into a corrupt system, sucking their very lifeblood to pay for assisted care. It's disgusting. I wouldn't trust that it's going to get any better until we can talk plainly about why it's okay to absorb all of their money to provide them with care.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I'm struggling to find where I used the term "those people."

 

[Wings]

I do not like, or dislike, you.

What I dislike is the personalized and fallacious manner in which you are trying to make your points. It's like talking to a smug, self-righteous teenager.

Sure.

What I don't like is how you talk about people who aren't you or who aren't your ideal.

 

[cowslinger64]

I do not like, or dislike, you.

What I dislike is the personalized and fallacious manner in which you are trying to make your points. It's like talking to a smug, self-righteous teenager.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/56/564edd96042be6f9fc73febbed9129b177b0a073d0666421037341846bfad71d.jpg

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

All it takes is one accident, one illness, one unfortunate incident to make us all poor, alone, maybe dying and in need of relief. Money doesn't guarantee care givers, family doesn't guarantee caregivers, compassionate friends don't guarantee caregivers. That's why we have social programs. Do I think it should be free, no. Do I think it can be fee based, maybe. I hate how our elderly are treated these days, their entire life savings sunk into a corrupt system, sucking their very lifeblood to pay for assisted care. It's disgusting. I wouldn't trust that it's going to get any better until we can talk plainly about why it's okay to absorb all of their money to provide them with care.

Because the premise was "12 months to live."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Sure.

What I don't like is how you talk about people who aren't you or who aren't your ideal.

I'm struggling to find where I used the term "those people."

Well?

 

[Wings]

I let this pas before the edit, but we're talking about the poor correct?

Is that class going to ever opt out of any freebie?

Well?

That class?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That class?

So, the poor are not a class?

Or is that Liberal dog-whistle for "those people?"

I am making principled economic argument using economic terms.

I also have pointed out that we work with the poor, I have worked with the poor, that this is the land of opportunity and that we believe that the poor is not a static group, there is economic mobility, both up and down, and yes tragedy does strike, and we can help people in both circumstances, but it is best achieved on the local level because when it becomes a national past-time, the net always continues to grow and so do the numbers in society who are sated by its hammock-like embrace and choose it as a viable life-style alternative.

What you and butters are engaging in is not actually engaging me, but putting words into my mouth, assuming base motive and a callous disregard for the suffering of others, none of which is either true, or even germane, to the economic points that I have been making.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I suppose that when I refer to "The Middle Class" that I am impugning "those people?"



:Fremdschämen:

 

[Que]

#ThosePeople as RacistDownSouth likes to call them frequently engage in #AscriptionAgain.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

#ThosePeople as RacistDownSouth likes to call them frequently engage in #AscriptionAgain.

Now when I refer to "The Ruling Class,"



I am probably impugning Dem...

 

[Ishmael]

All it takes is one accident, one illness, one unfortunate incident to make us all poor, alone, maybe dying and in need of relief. Money doesn't guarantee care givers, family doesn't guarantee caregivers, compassionate friends don't guarantee caregivers. That's why we have social programs. Do I think it should be free, no. Do I think it can be fee based, maybe. I hate how our elderly are treated these days, their entire life savings sunk into a corrupt system, sucking their very lifeblood to pay for assisted care. It's disgusting. I wouldn't trust that it's going to get any better until we can talk plainly about why it's okay to absorb all of their money to provide them with care.

Let me preface this reply with the fact that I am using the plural "you" not the personal "you." So don't take any of this personally unless it specifically applies.

So much here to deal with. First of all bad shit happens to good people, this is true and indeed unfortunate. But by what right do you, or anyone else for that matter, make financial demands on your neighbor? If your child is ill is it OK to go door to door with a gun and demand that your neighbors pay for the treatment? Essentially that is what you are doing, you are just having the government do the dirty work for you. Armed robbery by proxy.

Most of those 'kind and compassionate' care givers are just doing a job. Putting in their time until they can retire and get the fuck out of their miserable job. Yes, there are some that are actually caring, but they are the exception, not the rule. Find out where their after work watering hole is and just listen to the stories and the attitudes. After a couple of adult beverages they drop any pretense at altruism.

Everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is going to get sick and die. There are NO exceptions. It is also true that 80% of the dollars spent on healthcare on your behalf will be spent in the last 6 months of your life if heroic effort is expended on your behalf. It doesn't matter if you're 6 months old or 160 years old, those are the raw statistics. At some point the burden of costs will become overwhelming, even for the government, and they will begin to decide who is deserving of extraordinary treatment and who is going to die. And the population that made no provision to take care of themselves will have no recourse but to submit to the will of the state.

Ishmael

 

[Wings]

So, the poor are not a class?

Or is that Liberal dog-whistle for "those people?"

I am making principled economic argument using economic terms.

I also have pointed out that we work with the poor, I have worked with the poor, that this is the land of opportunity and that we believe that the poor is not a static group, there is economic mobility, both up and down, and yes tragedy does strike, and we can help people in both circumstances, but it is best achieved on the local level because when it becomes a national past-time, the net always continues to grow and so do the numbers in society who are sated by its hammock-like embrace and choose it as a viable life-style alternative.

What you and butters are engaging in is not actually engaging me, but putting words into my mouth, assuming base motive and a callous disregard for the suffering of others, none of which is either true, or even germane, to the economic points that I have been making.

And that you don't know why "that cunt" Butters and I are trying to bring other aspects of an argument like this into the conversation is why we are left shaking our heads at you. You want to argue economy, that's understandable, that you don't like that we bring compassion into it is not. You might not have callous disregard for suffering but you certainly have disdain for the poor class of people. And adding the compassion aspect isnt me being a bleeding heart. This sort of arrangement would require both financial reasoning and compassion. One doesn't have to be exclusively considered.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Let me preface this reply with the fact that I am using the plural "you" not the personal "you." So don't take any of this personally unless it specifically applies.

So much here to deal with. First of all bad shit happens to good people, this is true and indeed unfortunate. But by what right do you, or anyone else for that matter, make financial demands on your neighbor? If your child is ill is it OK to go door to door with a gun and demand that your neighbors pay for the treatment? Essentially that is what you are doing, you are just having the government do the dirty work for you. Armed robbery by proxy.

Most of those 'kind and compassionate' care givers are just doing a job. Putting in their time until they can retire and get the fuck out of their miserable job. Yes, there are some that are actually caring, but they are the exception, not the rule. Find out where their after work watering hole is and just listen to the stories and the attitudes. After a couple of adult beverages they drop any pretense at altruism.

Everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is going to get sick and die. There are NO exceptions. It is also true that 80% of the dollars spent on healthcare on your behalf will be spent in the last 6 months of your life if heroic effort is expended on your behalf. It doesn't matter if you're 6 months old or 160 years old, those are the raw statistics. At some point the burden of costs will become overwhelming, even for the government, and they will begin to decide who is deserving of extraordinary treatment and who is going to die. And the population that made no provision to take care of themselves will have no recourse but to submit to the will of the state.

Ishmael

Says the guy on Social Security and Medicare

 

[Ishmael]

Says the guy on Social Security and Medicare

And that was all quite voluntary, right moron?

Ishmael

 

[Wings]

Let me preface this reply with the fact that I am using the plural "you" not the personal "you." So don't take any of this personally unless it specifically applies.

So much here to deal with. First of all bad shit happens to good people, this is true and indeed unfortunate. But by what right do you, or anyone else for that matter, make financial demands on your neighbor? If your child is ill is it OK to go door to door with a gun and demand that your neighbors pay for the treatment? Essentially that is what you are doing, you are just having the government do the dirty work for you. Armed robbery by proxy.

Most of those 'kind and compassionate' care givers are just doing a job. Putting in their time until they can retire and get the fuck out of their miserable job. Yes, there are some that are actually caring, but they are the exception, not the rule. Find out where their after work watering hole is and just listen to the stories and the attitudes. After a couple of adult beverages they drop any pretense at altruism.

Everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is going to get sick and die. There are NO exceptions. It is also true that 80% of the dollars spent on healthcare on your behalf will be spent in the last 6 months of your life if heroic effort is expended on your behalf. It doesn't matter if you're 6 months old or 160 years old, those are the raw statistics. At some point the burden of costs will become overwhelming, even for the government, and they will begin to decide who is deserving of extraordinary treatment and who is going to die. And the population that made no provision to take care of themselves will have no recourse but to submit to the will of the state.

Ishmael

Ish, any time you have to preface your reply with a cop-out warning about the meaning of your words means you know what you're about to say is going to be pretty shitty. "I don't mean to offend" "I don't mean you but" and so on.

What sort of society do you want to live in? Do you want to be taken care of in your last days? Do you want to leave anything to your son after you're gone? Do you want your grandchildren to have some of your estate to maybe grow on, attend college or whatnot? Have you dealt with our palliative care in this country yet? Have you had to move a loved one into a nursing home yet?

 

[JohnnySavage]

And that was all quite voluntary, right moron?

Ishmael

Ahhh... name calling. How predictable.


You can always send your Social Security check back and pay cash for your medical needs.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And that you don't know why "that cunt" Butters and I are trying to bring other aspects of an argument like this into the conversation is why we are left shaking our heads at you. You want to argue economy, that's understandable, that you don't like that we bring compassion into it is not. You might not have callous disregard for suffering but you certainly have disdain for the poor class of people. And adding the compassion aspect isnt me being a bleeding heart. This sort of arrangement would require both financial reasoning and compassion. One doesn't have to be exclusively considered.

I know exactly why you are doing it.

But you are ignoring the point, as Ish just pointed out, at what point does compassion have to end before we make the entire society ill over the idea that not one single ill person should slip through the safety net. At what point are we so taxed that an individual is rendered incapable of taking care of themselves despite any and all effort and precaution taken to take care of their future needs. At what point does it become selfish to not surrender all earnings into a communal pool, each according to his ability and each according to his needs?

And again, the disturbing point to this conversation is how quickly the forces of compassion engage in personal attack in order to defend their generous nature (with everyone else's money).

butters will gladly tolerate Throb's abuse of children, his racism and his homophobia as long as he shares her compassion, but when I do not share her compassion and alligator tears over the issue of the day, she is more than happy to put words into my mouth that I never uttered in order to portray me as worse because I'm a racist too. By definition, I cannot be a racist. By word, I have never engaged in racism. But that is what she tried to brand me as and for that reason I call her a cunt, because she is what she is, a talker and not a doer. My family walks the walk when it comes to the poor. Where that love of the poor ends is where the opportunism of the professional poor begins at our expense.

 

[Wings]

I know exactly why you are doing it.

But you are ignoring the point, as Ish just pointed out, at what point does compassion have to end before we make the entire society ill over the idea that not one single ill person should slip through the safety net. At what point are we so taxed that an individual is rendered incapable of taking care of themselves despite any and all effort and precaution taken to take care of their future needs. At what point does it become selfish to not surrender all earnings into a communal pool, each according to his ability and each according to his needs?

And again, the disturbing point to this conversation is how quickly the forces of compassion engage in personal attack in order to defend their generous nature (with everyone else's money).

butters will gladly tolerate Throb's abuse of children, his racism and his homophobia as long as he shares her compassion, but when I do not share her compassion and alligator tears over the issue of the day, she is more than happy to put words into my mouth that I never uttered in order to portray me as worse because I'm a racist too. By definition, I cannot be a racist. By word, I have never engaged in racism. But that is what she tried to brand me as and for that reason I call her a cunt, because she is what she is, a talker and not a doer. My family walks the walk when it comes to the poor. Where that love of the poor ends is where the opportunism of the professional poor begins at our expense.

Do you think you have the only family that supports the poor?

I am not disturbed by bringing compassion into a healthcare argument because I believe these things have to go hand in hand. I did not once suggest that I believe everyone's earnings should be surrendered to the care of the sick, now you are putting words in MY mouth. Unless you'd care to show me where I suggested such a thing...

 

[Que]

What anyone "wants" for society at large or individuals that we care about makes absolutely no difference in the face of economic reality. Taking a sanctimonious perch about how wanting something that is untenable makes one more "compassionate" is posturing.

The resources available in a society is the sum total of the wealth of all members of that society. Deciding to plunder the few to placate the unreasonable mob in order that highly inefficient government agencies can then re-distribute the voted upon plunder is not the most efficient way to get resources to those that need it, all arguments about who does and does not 'deserve" it aside.

That argument will be entirely lost on those that "feel" that their sanctimonious words of compassion are more valuable than my actual, concrete acts. This is exactly why charitable giving by conservatives dwarfs the miserly donations of progressives. Voting for those that will play Robin Hood is the stand-in for doing something about it out of one's own pocket.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Our Usual Suspects never argue for income prioritization. Every month I examine my income and make a list of what I can and cant do when the money is deposited. This month I paid property taxes, in May I gotta give my grandson some money for high school graduation. It means some other stuff needs to wait till June or July.

Obama spent like 60 million so far to fly Moochelle's fat ass here and there. And every junket is like moving the Ringling circus across America. The bitch cant fly 1st class like regular celebrities. Our Usual Suspects would rather whine for new taxes than put some limits on her.

 

[Que]

Ahhh... name calling. How predictable.


You can always send your Social Security check back and pay cash for your medical needs.

A completely reasonable and defensible analogy so long as there is a mechanism to have the government send back 15% of all of his earnings, and to do it being mindful of the present value of a dollar from yesterday.

 

[JohnnySavage]

A completely reasonable and defensible analogy so long as there is a mechanism to have the government send back 15% of all of his earnings, and to do it being mindful of the present value of a dollar from yesterday.

His 15% paid for his parent's care.

There's nothing wrong with opposing the system; just have the courage of your convictions and refuse to accept government help.

 

[Que]

His 15% paid for his parent's care.

There's nothing wrong with opposing the system; just have the courage of your convictions and refuse to accept government help.

Still not at all analogous.

A) It was not voluntary

B) His parents care was promised to his parents for the meager sums that the initial recipients (who voted the ponzi scheme into place) paid into it. It is a pay-as-you-go scheme , not a familial account scheme.

I have wanted to opt out of this system since 1982 when I first noticed the theft from my paycheck. I would settle right now for the sum total of all of my money back, no interest, no future benefits.

You are offering me the opportunity to say. "Thanks for the rape, no thank you for the victims compensation."