Socialism is a crime against humanity

[Wilson23]

Would you like to explain the details of that assertion?

Rand was on Medicare.

 

[AlexBailey]

So then answer it if you understand it is easy.


We can add reading to your list of failures.

You’re really cognitively challenged.

I explained why smartphones as a product aren’t a good analogy. You just spun to say you were talking about service too.

You still haven’t acknowledged anything about the unique challenges of healthcare has compared to other products and services.

 

[Rightguide]

Rand was on Medicare.

The idea that her life somehow “debunks” her philosophy is like arguing that because a marathon runner stubbed their toe, running itself is a bad idea. Rand’s ethical and political arguments aren’t dependent on her bank balance or her health insurance; they’re about the principles by which a rational person should live and organize society. Rand did not rely on welfare in any systemic sense, philosophical principles aren’t guarantees of fortune or comfort, and experiencing hardship doesn’t invalidate an ethical system.

 

[TastySuckToy]

I explained why smartphones as a product aren’t a good analogy.

Your assertions on what a 'good' analogy is are irrelevant and not an argument.

You just spun to say you were talking about service too.

Correction: I stated it up front and you missed it because of your poor reading comprehension. That's why I quoted what I said earlier prior to your false claim.

You still haven’t acknowledged anything about the unique challenges of healthcare has compared to other products and services.

No one denies that all systems have unique challenges.

We're just rejecting your claim that healthcare cannot be tackled in a free market and competitive system.

 

[Wilson23]

We're just rejecting your claim that healthcare cannot be tackled in a free market and competitive system.

But rejecting with no support. There are no real-world instances of a competitive system that works as well as UHC.

Remember WHAT "competition" we're talking about here. It is not between doctors or hospitals. It is between insurance companies. And those are NOT in competition, they are cartelized.

 

[AlexBailey]

Would you like to explain the details of that assertion?

I’m not going to bother for now.

Feel free to look it up. But be sure to look beyond the Objectivist websites. They bend over backwards to say it didn’t happen even though they cite her later writings about how it was justified.

 

[AlexBailey]

Your assertions on what a 'good' analogy is are irrelevant and not an argument.

Correction: I stated it up front and you missed it because of your poor reading comprehension. That's why I quoted what I said earlier prior to your false claim.

No one denies that all systems have unique challenges.

We're just rejecting your claim that healthcare cannot be tackled in a free market and competitive system.

So in your perspective the ones who fall Turo the cracks don’t matter. This is contrary to one of the stated purposes for the US Constitution - “to promote the general welfare”.

This is where you argue the meanings of the words “general”, “welfare” and “promote.”


Still waiting for you to make a reasoned point that applies to health care and how it serves the general population.

 

[Wilson23]

The idea that her life somehow “debunks” her philosophy is like arguing that because a marathon runner stubbed their toe, running itself is a bad idea. Rand’s ethical and political arguments aren’t dependent on her bank balance or her health insurance; they’re about the principles by which a rational person should live and organize society. Rand did not rely on welfare in any systemic sense, philosophical principles aren’t guarantees of fortune or comfort, and experiencing hardship doesn’t invalidate an ethical system.

Rand wrote fiction in which people who get any public benefits at all are portrayed as social criminals, deserving of death, for that reason alone.

 

[Rightguide]

Rand wrote fiction in which people who get any public benefits at all are portrayed as social criminals, deserving of death, for that reason alone.

Show us the quote.

 

[Wilson23]

Show us the quote.

It's in "Atlas Shrugged" and it is a scene where a bunch of people are riding a train about to be wrecked by Objectivist terrorists. Rand makes a case they deserve it by detailing how each has depended on the state.

 

[TastySuckToy]

So in your perspective the ones who fall Turo the cracks don’t matter.

You're not morally or ethically justified robbing someone just because you claim it's to help someone else.

 

[Wilson23]

You're not morally or ethically justified robbing someone just because you claim it's to help someone else.

In ethical terms, "Property is theft" trumps "Taxation is theft."

 

[AlexBailey]

You're not morally or ethically justified robbing someone just because you claim it's to help someone else.

Benefit provides everyone with access to services. It’s not really theft is it?

At least no more so than the infrastructure you use daily.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Benefit provides everyone with access to services. It’s not really theft is it?

If you take a hundred dollars from me and spread it around the room, give me a dollar and point out everyone else got a dollar too, you still stole from me. So yes, it really is theft.

 

[TomTeacher19]

If you take a hundred dollars from me and spread it around the room, give me a dollar and point out everyone else got a dollar too, you still stole from me. So yes, it really is theft.

That's not socialism. But it is a good clear example that you, like most people, have no idea what it really is

 

[Wilson23]

If you take a hundred dollars from me and spread it around the room, give me a dollar and point out everyone else got a dollar too, you still stole from me. So yes, it really is theft.

In ethical terms, "Property is theft" trumps "Taxation is theft."

 

[TastySuckToy]

That's not socialism.

That's exactly what socialism is. Taking from those who acquired resources and distributing it to everyone else. Once that system is in place, those who are productive stop being productive, because there is no reward for productivity. Productivity collapses and society turns into a shithole with bread lines and ten year long waits for cars, because no one is going to work hard or for free when their labour yields nothing in return.

 

[AlexBailey]

If you take a hundred dollars from me and spread it around the room, give me a dollar and point out everyone else got a dollar too, you still stole from me. So yes, it really is theft.

If you take $100 from everyone in a community and use it to make the community better able to thrive with better infrastructure and services it isn’t really theft.

 

[TomTeacher19]

That's exactly what socialism is. Taking from those who acquired resources and distributing it to everyone else. Once that system is in place, those who are productive stop being productive, because there is no reward for productivity. Productivity collapses and society turns into a shithole with bread lines and ten year long waits for cars, because no one is going to work hard or for free when their labour yields nothing in return.

Please keep flapping your moronic lips if you wish, but that's still not what socialism is, so all you really keep proving is you're either ignorant or dishonest (and from all your posts I've seen - it's both)

 

[AlexBailey]

Your assertions on what a 'good' analogy is are irrelevant and not an argument.

You made a bad analogy. I critiqued it and provided a better one. Did I hurt your feelings?

Correction: I stated it up front and you missed it because of your poor reading comprehension. That's why I quoted what I said earlier prior to your false claim.

Nope. You never stated how a market system would provide better healthcare coverage and services than most social democracies. You simply claimed that competition would fix it.

No one denies that all systems have unique challenges.

So can you address the myriad challenges unique to healthcare? Or is that too inconvenient for your argument?

We're just rejecting your claim that healthcare cannot be tackled in a free market and competitive system.

My claim is that a market based system leaves a significant part of the population behind - enough that it destabilizes a society.

This is why Republicans are having trouble coming up with a plan they can sell to the population.

Do you disagree? How and why?

 

[Iluv17]

TRUTH and it will never be socialist NEVER! In fact, there isnt.going to be a socialist country left when this is.over TRUTH

 

[TastySuckToy]

Please keep flapping your moronic lips if you wish, but that's still not what socialism is,

Socialism is an economic and political system based on public or collective ownership of the means of production, rather than private ownership. It aims to reduce inequality by distributing resources according to human needs, often through government planning, and focuses on worker control and the fair distribution of wealth

• • Equality: Aims to eliminate class distinctions by distributing wealth and resources more equitably.

In other words, exactly what I said.

Anyone who is productive and acquires resources will have those resources seized and redistributed. Therefore completely annihilating any incentive to be productive in the first place.

That is why socialism always fails and collapses society. People do not work hard or productively without incentive and reward.

 

[Wilson23]

TRUTH and it will never be socialist NEVER! In fact, there isnt.going to be a socialist country left when this is.over TRUTHView attachment 2601378

What is the date on "over"? The present government of China will still be in power when Trump leaves office.

Cuba, maybe not.

 

[appalachianplay1]

My claim is that a market based system leaves a significant part of the population behind - enough that it destabilizes a society.

100% this. The problem is that some people who are not presently a part of that population assume they never will be. If it doesn't affect them or their family personally, they don't care.

 

[TomTeacher19]

In other words, exactly what I said.

Anyone who is productive and acquires resources will have those resources seized and redistributed. Therefore completely annihilating any incentive to be productive in the first place.

That is why socialism always fails and collapses society. People do not work hard or productively without incentive and reward.

Failed miserably again.

It's not even that complicated or hard to see how what is written there is NOT the same thing you have said and continue to say.

Of course you clearly don't have much brain capacity so it's not actually entirely shocking that you both cannot fathom how you are wrong about it but also that you can't see , though it is very clear, how what you are saying is not the same.