Healthcare: Right or Privilege?

[Freiheit Reich]

I believe I said we should PULL OUT of those organizations and declare ourselves free of international laws.

Again, why do you hate the U.S. so much?

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

[Abdelkicker]

Doctors and nurses can't be slaves to patients because they are the solution to curing illness and they get paid for all this.

[Samuraikoku]

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

The U.S. is independent and free. The UN Charter does not affect its sovereignty in any way.

Abandoning international law would cause the U.S. to be in a situation similar to Israel. Is that what you're looking for?

[Chinese Regions]

Again, why do you hate the U.S. so much?

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

Do you hate the rest of the world?

[Samozaryadnyastan]

This is not possible.
The whole point of the Declaration of Human Rights is that they apply to all nations, whether UN member states or not (and the US should be setting a fucking example, being a permanent security council seat holder).

I find it rather telling that your opposition to state-funded healthcare is 'who will pay for it'?
Especially since you don't realise that it doesn't demean doctors, push them into any kind of 'slavery' or bullshit , the UK does decently well funding vital care through taxes and elective surgeries and such through the private sector.

But-but-but taxes are theft!

Which we've already established as bullshit in another thread because the Union has specific rights to collect tax from you.
Apologies if you were being sarcastic, I can't recall what your actual opinion on that topic was.

[Freiheit Reich]

This is not possible.
The whole point of the Declaration of Human Rights is that they apply to all nations, whether UN member states or not (and the US should be setting a fucking example, being a permanent security council seat holder).

I find it rather telling that your opposition to state-funded healthcare is 'who will pay for it'?
Especially since you don't realise that it doesn't demean doctors, push them into any kind of 'slavery' or bullshit , the UK does decently well funding vital care through taxes and elective surgeries and such through the private sector.

But-but-but taxes are theft!

Taxes are theft if they are used to pay for more than what government should provide for the people. Government is needed but in a much more limited role. Here is what a smart lady believed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

Objectivism views government as "the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control—i.e., under objectively defined laws;" thus, government is both legitimate and critically important[76] in order to protect individual rights.[77] Rand opposed so-called "anarchism," because she saw putting police and courts on the market as an inherent miscarriage of justice.."[78] Objectivism holds that the proper functions of a government are "the police, to protect men from criminals—the armed services, to protect men from foreign invaders—the law courts, to settle disputes among men according to objectively defined laws," the executive, and legislatures.[79] Furthermore, in protecting individual rights, the government is acting as an agent of its citizens and "has no rights except the rights delegated to it by the citizens"[80] and it must act in an impartial manner according to specific, objectively defined laws.[81] Prominent Objectivists Leonard Peikoff and Yaron Brook have since expressed support for other government functions.[82][83]

[Samozaryadnyastan]

>quoted rand
>credibility gone

[Samuraikoku]

But-but-but taxes are theft!

Taxes are theft if they are used to pay for more than what government should provide for the people. Government is needed but in a much more limited role. Here is what a smart lady believed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

Objectivism views government as "the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control—i.e., under objectively defined laws;" thus, government is both legitimate and critically important[76] in order to protect individual rights.[77] Rand opposed so-called "anarchism," because she saw putting police and courts on the market as an inherent miscarriage of justice.."[78] Objectivism holds that the proper functions of a government are "the police, to protect men from criminals—the armed services, to protect men from foreign invaders—the law courts, to settle disputes among men according to objectively defined laws," the executive, and legislatures.[79] Furthermore, in protecting individual rights, the government is acting as an agent of its citizens and "has no rights except the rights delegated to it by the citizens"[80] and it must act in an impartial manner according to specific, objectively defined laws.[81] Prominent Objectivists Leonard Peikoff and Yaron Brook have since expressed support for other government functions.[82][83]

Ayn Rand lived her final years using public healthcare.

[Freiheit Reich]

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

The U.S. is independent and free. The UN Charter does not affect its sovereignty in any way.

Abandoning international law would cause the U.S. to be in a situation similar to Israel. Is that what you're looking for?

Sure, a country that is tough and does not take crap from their neighbors. Israel is well respected for its toughness and courage. The USA engages in useless wars and looks weaker each time (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan). Actually, Israel is nicer to the Palestinians than I would be. I would deport them all unless they changed religion (anything non-Islamic) and signed an agreement accepting Jewish settlement. Israel has been very tolerant.

Many European nations and the USA seem to forget, Israel is a beacon of light (a civilized democracy) in a sea of darkness (the Middle East). Geert Wilders (Netherlands politician) has been right in his pro-Israel stance.

[Enadail]

>quoted rand
>credibility gone

>called rand a smart lady
>cited objectivism as if it has any relevance to the real world
>can't take seriously

[Abdelkicker]

Again, why do you hate the U.S. so much?

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

USA loses face by rejecting the promises they made in making NATO and joining the UN.. it'd further isolate them from the international community

[Samuraikoku]

The USA engages in useless wars and looks weaker each time (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan).

How has that anything to do with the U.N.?

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I'm fairly certain the UN was completely uninvolved in any of those.

[Freiheit Reich]

[spoiler]

Taxes are theft if they are used to pay for more than what government should provide for the people. Government is needed but in a much more limited role. Here is what a smart lady believed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

Objectivism views government as "the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control—i.e., under objectively defined laws;" thus, government is both legitimate and critically important[76] in order to protect individual rights.[77] Rand opposed so-called "anarchism," because she saw putting police and courts on the market as an inherent miscarriage of justice.."[78] Objectivism holds that the proper functions of a government are "the police, to protect men from criminals—the armed services, to protect men from foreign invaders—the law courts, to settle disputes among men according to objectively defined laws," the executive, and legislatures.[79] Furthermore, in protecting individual rights, the government is acting as an agent of its citizens and "has no rights except the rights delegated to it by the citizens"[80] and it must act in an impartial manner according to specific, objectively defined laws.[81] Prominent Objectivists Leonard Peikoff and Yaron Brook have since expressed support for other government functions.[82][83]

Ayn Rand lived her final years using public healthcare.

[/spoiler]

Classic liberal argument, she addressed in in 1966 and liberals ignore her comments:

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/libera ... -benefits/

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blo ... ecting-it/

[Samuraikoku]

Classic liberal argument, she addressed in in 1966 and liberals ignore her comments:

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/libera ... -benefits/

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blo ... ecting-it/

Hipocrisy is hipocrisy, can't justify doing against what you preach now can you?

This being you, I believe you can, since you've shown hipocrisy in every thread I've seen you comment.

[Freiheit Reich]

OK, you are copying F. D. Bluth. Repeating a line that makes no sense. We had a Declaration of Independence in the past and now we are signing away our independence to a group of members such as the UN, NATO, etc...

I want the USA to be independent and free. How is that hate?

USA loses face by rejecting the promises they made in making NATO and joining the UN.. it'd further isolate them from the international community

The USA will state that the politicians who supported that law are dead and a new era of freedom and independence has been ushered in. The USA will also state that they hope other nations will support freedom, even if it means some poor people may suffer if charities can't pay for their needs and no private donations are recieved.

The USA will not be isolated. They will engage in free trade and tourism/commerce will exist between the USA and other nations.

[Chinese Regions]

The U.S. is independent and free. The UN Charter does not affect its sovereignty in any way.

Abandoning international law would cause the U.S. to be in a situation similar to Israel. Is that what you're looking for?

Sure, a country that is tough and does not take crap from their neighbors. Israel is well respected for its toughness and courage. The USA engages in useless wars and looks weaker each time (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan). Actually, Israel is nicer to the Palestinians than I would be. I would deport them all unless they changed religion (anything non-Islamic) and signed an agreement accepting Jewish settlement. Israel has been very tolerant.

Many European nations and the USA seem to forget, Israel is a beacon of light (a civilized democracy) in a sea of darkness (the Middle East). Geert Wilders (Netherlands politician) has been right in his pro-Israel stance.

The UN had nothing to do with those wars.

[Freiheit Reich]

The USA engages in useless wars and looks weaker each time (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan).

How has that anything to do with the U.N.?

Addressing your post about why the USA being more like Israel could be good. The USA is seen as a wimp. We are losing to backwards nations like Afghanistan, Vietnam, and we lost Iraq (yes, we lost more than we gained). Being tough like Israel could be good.

[Chinese Regions]

How has that anything to do with the U.N.?

Addressing your post about why the USA being more like Israel could be good. The USA is seen as a wimp. We are losing to backwards nations like Afghanistan, Vietnam, and we lost Iraq (yes, we lost more than we gained). Being tough like Israel could be good.

By making Canadian and Mexican neighbours really really hate the USA?

[Freiheit Reich]

Classic liberal argument, she addressed in in 1966 and liberals ignore her comments:

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/libera ... -benefits/

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blo ... ecting-it/

Hipocrisy is hipocrisy, can't justify doing against what you preach now can you?

This being you, I believe you can, since you've shown hipocrisy in every thread I've seen you comment.

You steal from me and offer me my money back, what should I say? 'No, I hate theft but if I take back my money it means I support theft'?

She took her money back, she was selfish as we should be. 'Virtue of Selfishness' she followed that code in this case.

[Chinese Regions]

Hipocrisy is hipocrisy, can't justify doing against what you preach now can you?

This being you, I believe you can, since you've shown hipocrisy in every thread I've seen you comment.

You steal from me and offer me my money back, what should I say? 'No, I hate theft but if I take back my money it means I support theft'?

She took her money back, she was selfish as we should be. 'Virtue of Selfishness' she followed that code in this case.

Paying for a service you have used is stealing apparently.

[Freiheit Reich]

You steal from me and offer me my money back, what should I say? 'No, I hate theft but if I take back my money it means I support theft'?

She took her money back, she was selfish as we should be. 'Virtue of Selfishness' she followed that code in this case.

Paying for a service you have used is stealing apparently.

Given the choice she would have likely opted out of the system meaning no money out and no benefits in. She had no choice but to be part of the system. She used a service she was forced to pay for.

[Mavorpen]

Paying for a service you have used is stealing apparently.

Given the choice she would have likely opted out of the system meaning no money out and no benefits in. She had no choice but to be part of the system. She used a service she was forced to pay for.

Which...doesn't make it stealing. At all.

[President Andrew Jackson]

It's a privilege to rich, powerful people. POWs and enemies to the government and convicts lost there rights.

Oh...slaves are optional, their owner decides

[Enadail]

Paying for a service you have used is stealing apparently.

Given the choice she would have likely opted out of the system meaning no money out and no benefits in. She had no choice but to be part of the system. She used a service she was forced to pay for.

As a child, you start using the system before you pay for it, and over the course of your lifetime, as money you are taxed is invested, you get back more then you put in. By taking services, she, and all other "taxes are theft" people, are hypocrites. If they're just taking back the money they put in, they should stop using a lot of services.