Quite Possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard

[Thunder_Snus]

I cannot deny that the whole situation is really complex. But I think you can have good socialism and you can have bad free-market capitalism because real life is not that simple. It all depends on where you put the dividing line between what should be government responsibility and private enterprise - healthcare lies slap bang in the middle ground along with public libraries and the postal service. I don't think any right-thinking person would suggest that you fund your own police force - just as nobody would suggest that snus should be produced by the state and distributed evenly (although that would be nice).

A country can only afford the services it chooses to provide if it pays for it by taxation. When you say the current security/healthcare plans cannot be afforded - you mean by the state at current US taxation levels. If the system was abolished there would still be enough money in the majority of people's pockets to afford healthcare - it's just how you choose to pay for it. You can complain about people playing the system; but if it's a question between that and a poor old lady who's fallen on hard times being left without proper care I know I'd choose the imperfect but caring system over the hard-nosed "look the other way and charities will probably sort it out" system all day long.



^^^ now that is something I think we can all agree on - and that holds true for almost every country I can think of!

Cheers

Squeezy

Definitely, i think from a young age we are taught about the free market here. It's not something you can really explain to a child but this is the free market and its the best if anyone says anything should change then they want socialism or even worse communism and thats not free those people are evil....Not something that happens word for word but something that is definitely instilled in our minds. It's something we learn so early on that people reject it without knowing what it really is. People don't realize cash for clunkers was socialism. You could sell your old worthless car for way more than it was worth to get a new more gas efficient car. Collective bargaining in most of our sport leagues, thats socialism. What i was saying about the current social security/medicare/medicade though its a little bit more complicated than raising taxes. At our current rate of increase on that all of the taxes provided by the government can not support that just by itself by the year 2030. So the gov't brings in taxes of 10billion well guess what that program is costing us 11 billion in 2030. So we not only cant afford that but anything else the government spends for. Obviously the numbers are larger just an example.
Our country has had quite a recovery but still the main problem is still here. People do not know how to live within their means. Housing prices were booming so people were taking mortgages they couldnt afford because **** it by the time they forclose i'll have enough equity in this house to sell it and turn a profit since home prices are going up 7% a year. At the same time banks were making incredibly risky default swaps because it could turn them a profit....as long as people didnt default. They knew how risky these were and continued to make their portfolio contain almost nothing but these default swaps. Noone has the discipline to try to work for the things they want. I want to travel the world with my wife after i retire. I'm 20 years old and already have a 401k plan (not sure if this is something england has) most of my peers wont even start one until they are 35, if ever. More and more people are retiring either in debt or with absolutely no savings. People live outside their means their entire careers until they realize that paycheck they get every week wont come in when they retire.

[Zimobog]

Theft is immoral. Taxes, unless they are voluntary, are theft.

If it is said that we can only have police, a library, schools, or healthcare because of taxes than what is really being said is that humans can only live by theft and the forced involuntary extract of goods and wealth. It is wrong for me to take money from someone at gunpoint, in order to be morally consistant than I must also say that is wrong for me to ask that armed men hired by me to take money from someone at gunpoint.

Can we base a system on theft and expect that it will be just and moral?

[CzechCzar]

+1000000000

Remember when what they are now saying about healthcare was said about telephones, airlines, etc...? Or, d'ya know that a looooong time ago, emergency fire services were privately provided?

Theft is immoral. Taxes, unless they are voluntary, are theft.

If it is said that we can only have police, a library, schools, or healthcare because of taxes than what is really being said is that humans can only live by theft and the forced involuntary extract of goods and wealth. It is wrong for me to take money from someone at gunpoint, in order to be morally consistant than I must also say that is wrong for me to ask that armed men hired by me to take money from someone at gunpoint.

Can we base a system on theft and expect that it will be just and moral?

[Zimobog]

In two different towns here in Alaska (Houston and Salcha), professional firefighters from other areas have built their own firehouses, purchased their own equipment/inspections/certifications and offer emergency fire service on a subscription basis.

They respond to residential fires at the homes yearly subscribers and for free to keep brushfires and non-subscriber fires from spreading (and it's good advertising). People who don't wish to subscribe don't have to.

When I lived outside of the state, there were many private ambulance/EMT outfits. They would function like taxis, waiting for dispatch calls and providing EMT services and transportation to hospitals. They would bill insurance companies and private individuals for their services.

[Thunder_Snus]

Theft is immoral. Taxes, unless they are voluntary, are theft.

If it is said that we can only have police, a library, schools, or healthcare because of taxes than what is really being said is that humans can only live by theft and the forced involuntary extract of goods and wealth. It is wrong for me to take money from someone at gunpoint, in order to be morally consistant than I must also say that is wrong for me to ask that armed men hired by me to take money from someone at gunpoint.

Can we base a system on theft and expect that it will be just and moral?

The problem with that is that government can not be sustained without taxation. A government can not DO anything that generates revenue. When it comes down it to the basic principle of government is we all have a voice but the decisions that need to be made are on a day to day basis. lets elect someone to speak our voice. That person won't have a job like the rest of us but he needs to be compensated. Let's all give x percentage of our paychecks to pay for these people that make our decisions on our behalf. The only problem is that with most governments those people we elect are not speaking on our behalf but on their own. Without taxes we would not have roads/police/fire/ambulance/public schools etc. The problem with taxation is when it is being used for something the people do not think fairly represents them. People are taxed for medicade and medicare some of that is just, the people that need it now were being taxed to provide it for people who needed it when they were young. The system is constantly played by people who do not need these benefits because they simply refuse to work or cite a problem that is either their own fault or something that does not effect their work ability. People cite being too fat to work as a reason to get welfare. Is it everyone elses problem in the country that you did not take care of yourself? If there was an actual medical condition that caused people to gain weight regardless of diet and excercise regimen fine that is something that the people should help with. However it is not my responsibility to pay for you to not work because you ate big macs and whoppers with a gallon of coke while i ate salads and lean meats with lemonade.

When a government does not exist or does not have adequate funds to provide for its people then someone will step in with a promise he can. It's pretty much how every totalitarianism government forms. Blaming the idea of government is not the solution, blaming the people that run our government is.

[Zimobog]

Without taxes we would not have roads/police/fire/ambulance/public schools etc.

None of those are dependent on taxes or even governments. I even posted examples of fire and ambulance services in existence today that are not dependent on government. How many schools does the Catholic church run, how many kids have private school educations, how many kids are homeschooled?

The problem with that is that government can not be sustained without taxation.

And the problem with theft is that it is immoral and unjust. Don't expect a system based on immorality and theft to be fair or just to individuals.

Blaming the idea of government is not the solution, blaming the people that run our government is.

You have identified a key concept here: that there actually is NO government, just a bunch of people who pretend they are such a thing andbegin to initate force on those around them. There is no such thing as a government, there is only gangs (or mobs) of individuals claiming central authority and a justified monopoly on violence and force.

People are taxed for medicade and medicare some of that is just, the people that need it now were being taxed to provide it for people who needed it when they were young. The system is constantly played by people who do not need these benefits because they simply refuse to work or cite a problem that is either their own fault or something that does not effect their work ability. People cite being too fat to work as a reason to get welfare. Is it everyone elses problem in the country that you did not take care of yourself? If there was an actual medical condition that caused people to gain weight regardless of diet and excercise regimen fine that is something that the people should help with. However it is not my responsibility to pay for you to not work because you ate big macs and whoppers with a gallon of coke while i ate salads and lean meats with lemonade.

I think you have a good point here, but instead of the armed gang called "government" stealing my earnings at gunpoint, how about I continue to donate $5000 dollars a year to Habitat for Humanity as well as volunteer my skills to build homes, donate goods and money to the Red Cross as well as provide free home board-ups for residental fire victims, suport my local Pug Rescue with $1000 a year, or all the other things I do because I care about people (and pugs)?

See the difference is that I willing choose to do one, and I hate doing the other: because someone else is doing it immorally and violently without my consent.

There is no incentive for the government gangs to provide any of these services effectively or with any restrain. When they can extract from a person their property and earnings, they will continue to do so with impunity. Something like 4/5 of the money they forcibily extract from you to provide these "services" to others is spent on the cost of administrating the programs and on the pensions of people inside the gang.

The problem with taxation is when it is being used for something the people do not think fairly represents them.

I just have a problem with stealing. I don't care how benevolent the cause is. It is much easier for the monopoly gang to be generous when the money is stolen. I think we as individuals are very charitable and can take care of people who don't have enough. I think we are creative and can figure out how to police ourselves, how to educate ourselves, and how to serve each other best.

If we base our efforts to do anything collectively on the the idea that force is acceptable and that theft is moral, we will live in society where force and theft are common.

[Thunder_Snus]

None of those are dependent on taxes or even governments. I even posted examples of fire and ambulance services in existence today that are not dependent on government. How many schools does the Catholic church run, how many kids have private school educations, how many kids are homeschooled?

And the problem with theft is that it is immoral and unjust. Don't expect a system based on immorality and theft to be fair or just to individuals.


You have identified a key concept here: that there actually is NO government, just a bunch of people who pretend they are such a thing andbegin to initate force on those around them. There is no such thing as a government, there is only gangs (or mobs) of individuals claiming central authority and a justified monopoly on violence and force.




I think you have a good point here, but instead of the armed gang called "government" stealing my earnings at gunpoint, how about I continue to donate $5000 dollars a year to Habitat for Humanity as well as volunteer my skills to build homes, donate goods and money to the Red Cross as well as provide free home board-ups for residental fire victims, suport my local Pug Rescue with $1000 a year, or all the other things I do because I care about people (and pugs)?

See the difference is that I willing choose to do one, and I hate doing the other: because someone else is doing it immorally and violently without my consent.

There is no incentive for the government gangs to provide any of these services effectively or with any restrain. When they can extract from a person their property and earnings, they will continue to do so with impunity. Something like 4/5 of the money they forcibily extract from you to provide these "services" to others is spent on the cost of administrating the programs and on the pensions of people inside the gang.

I just have a problem with stealing. I don't care how benevolent the cause is. It is much easier for the monopoly gang to be generous when the money is stolen. I think we as individuals are very charitable and can take care of people who don't have enough. I think we are creative and can figure out how to police ourselves, how to educate ourselves, and how to serve each other best.

If we base our efforts to do anything collectively on the the idea that force is acceptable and that theft is moral, we will live in society where force and theft are common.

Definitely great points you made but something important to remember is that not everyone is like you or me.....you may be a person that helps people......and pugs, but some people are not even willing to help themselves. What happens when one of these private EMT or fire department services forms a monopoly and then drives up prices. these things need to be regulated. Public schools are free (or atleast very cheap) most of the time. If every school is private its not hard for them to charge more and more until they get to tell the poor "lol tough shit" For every 5000 dollar you donate to help people with medical expenses there are 1M in dollars being used to treat people in emergency rooms with headaches. Just to keep this post short because i need to get back to studying. Yes everything you say is correct but taking government away does not accomplish everything as easy as one two. The problem is the people that are worst at representing the voice of the people are the ones that know exactly how to get into a position to do so. the best government should be made up of people saying "this would help more people than it hurt....ok lets do it" The best president isnt the one who worked his way up the politcal ladder from mayor to governor to senator and so on its some guy that can look at things rationally and make an informed decision for the greater good.

[Zimobog]

Definitely great points you made but something important to remember is that not everyone is like you or me.....you may be a person that helps people......and pugs, but some people are not even willing to help themselves. What happens when one of these private EMT or fire department services forms a monopoly and then drives up prices. these things need to be regulated.

I think you and I might have some common ground in our views, so I don't mean any of this just to be argumentative or to troll you or or anything.

However, what you are saying is that you are concerned about a PRIVATE monopoly on EMT and Fire Service, while at the same time advocating for a GOVERNMENT monopoly on EMT and Fire Service. I find that to be a logical problem in that opinion, however popular the opinion may be held.

If a private monopoly situation was to occur, competitors are always free to join in and steal away customers by offering lower prices or better service for your money. In a government monopoly, the government refuses to allow a competitor and everyone is stuck with the service they provide however lousy and expensive it might be.

Also, if a government monopoly finds that it needs more money to provide the service it can simply extract it from you and I by gunpoint, tying you up until you pay, and seizing your property. A private monopoly has no such power. Even if they occur they never last and are rarely violent against their consumer base.

Look at it like this: If you went to a Holiday Store and the clerk was rude, the price was too high, and the bathroom was dirty you would stop at the Texaco next time. They compete for your money and all interactions you have with them are totally voluntary and mutually benefical. Most of the companies accused of "monopolistic behavior" have actually done a good job of pleasing their customer and that is how they stay in business.

What is your choice right now when the DMV is rude? What is your choice if the police can't find your missing TV or, god forbid, child? What recourse do any of us have if we feel that public schools are failing? The gang called government will still show up by April 15 with machine guns if need be to extract resources from you regardless and without alternatives.

Public schools are free (or atleast very cheap) most of the time. If every school is private its not hard for them to charge more and more until they get to tell the poor "lol tough shit"

Public schools are "free"? Haven't we all paid property taxes (whether we have children or not) to pay for them? Haven't even renters paid for them in the form of higher rents? Haven't even the unborn to the fourth generation paid for them in the form of government bonds of debt to paid by future taxpayer who don't even exist yet?

In my area, it costs between $14,000-$20,000 per student per year to educate a child in a public school. It is not, nor has ever been, "free".

The poor are exactly the people who would benefit most from a free market of schools, because so many of the public schools the poor attend
are those with the greatest failure factor. There are many great examples of so-called "store front" schools in Harlem that turned out excellent students in areas where people were very poor.

You see, the rich have always had choices, it's time we offer the same freedom to the poor. That can't be done in a government monopoly.

For every 5000 dollar you donate to help people with medical expenses there are 1M in dollars being used to treat people in emergency rooms with headaches.

Free medicine creates a "moral hazard". Because I don't have to pay for an ER visit for a headache, I go there often. Because I don't have to worry about the expense or concequences of having more children than I can afford, I don't use contraception. When moral hazards are removed, people self-regulate destructive behaviors.

Yes everything you say is correct but taking government away does not accomplish everything as easy as one two. The problem is the people that are worst at representing the voice of the people are the ones that know exactly how to get into a position to do so. the best government should be made up of people saying "this would help more people than it hurt....ok lets do it" The best president isnt the one who worked his way up the politcal ladder from mayor to governor to senator and so on its some guy that can look at things rationally and make an informed decision for the greater good.

So that is why we, like Frodo Baggins, have to throw the ring of power into the volcano. Evil people are attracted to power, and ultimate power can corrupt even the most wise and generous.

I am not asking for an end to rules so I can smoke more drugs or be a greedy bastard, what I am asking is that we base our society on non-aggression and the removal of the threat of force from our interactions. Governments are nothing but individuals claiming a right to use force on those around them, and we as citizens have become conditioned to think that it is fine. But we can't have it both ways. If we can agree that the initation of force is immoral, than all governments are immoral and should be abolished.

[Thunder_Snus]

I think you and I might have some common ground in our views, so I don't mean any of this just to be argumentative or to troll you or or anything.

However, what you are saying is that you are concerned about a PRIVATE monopoly on EMT and Fire Service, while at the same time advocating for a GOVERNMENT monopoly on EMT and Fire Service. I find that to be a logical problem in that opinion, however popular the opinion may be held.

If a private monopoly situation was to occur, competitors are always free to join in and steal away customers by offering lower prices or better service for your money. In a government monopoly, the government refuses to allow a competitor and everyone is stuck with the service they provide however lousy and expensive it might be.

Also, if a government monopoly finds that it needs more money to provide the service it can simply extract it from you and I by gunpoint, tying you up until you pay, and seizing your property. A private monopoly has no such power. Even if they occur they never last and are rarely violent against their consumer base.

Look at it like this: If you went to a Holiday Store and the clerk was rude, the price was too high, and the bathroom was dirty you would stop at the Texaco next time. They compete for your money and all interactions you have with them are totally voluntary and mutually benefical. Most of the companies accused of "monopolistic behavior" have actually done a good job of pleasing their customer and that is how they stay in business.

What is your choice right now when the DMV is rude? What is your choice if the police can't find your missing TV or, god forbid, child? What recourse do any of us have if we feel that public schools are failing? The gang called government will still show up by April 15 with machine guns if need be to extract resources from you regardless and without alternatives.


Public schools are "free"? Haven't we all paid property taxes (whether we have children or not) to pay for them? Haven't even renters paid for them in the form of higher rents? Haven't even the unborn to the fourth generation paid for them in the form of government bonds of debt to paid by future taxpayer who don't even exist yet?

In my area, it costs between $14,000-$20,000 per student per year to educate a child in a public school. It is not, nor has ever been, "free".

The poor are exactly the people who would benefit most from a free market of schools, because so many of the public schools the poor attend
are those with the greatest failure factor. There are many great examples of so-called "store front" schools in Harlem that turned out excellent students in areas where people were very poor.

You see, the rich have always had choices, it's time we offer the same freedom to the poor. That can't be done in a government monopoly.



Free medicine creates a "moral hazard". Because I don't have to pay for an ER visit for a headache, I go there often. Because I don't have to worry about the expense or concequences of having more children than I can afford, I don't use contraception. When moral hazards are removed, people self-regulate destructive behaviors.




So that is why we, like Frodo Baggins, have to throw the ring of power into the volcano. Evil people are attracted to power, and ultimate power can corrupt even the most wise and generous.

I am not asking for an end to rules so I can smoke more drugs or be a greedy bastard, what I am asking is that we base our society on non-aggression and the removal of the threat of force from our interactions. Governments are nothing but individuals claiming a right to use force on those around them, and we as citizens have become conditioned to think that it is fine. But we can't have it both ways. If we can agree that the initation of force is immoral, than all governments are immoral and should be abolished.

Definitely. And the same to you i dont come at this for arguement or to say you're wrong but just say government disapeared. Everyone packed up their shit and left. Theres MILLIONS of jobs in government positions. Not only administrators but the little economists the people who build roads and our armed forces. Sure these private EMT fire stations and schools could all pop up but it would take time. for every 10 of these places that popped up 9 of them would fail leaving tons without jobs. Without government we have no armed forces. Our entire navy,army,marine core etc would all be left without a job coming into the job market where no jobs exist for a good amount of people that are already looking. If banks arent regulated it will be the 1930's all over again. When the people on duty at these fire stations say **** it during a call who holds them accountable? Who polices our cities? If its up to a whole town to just pay a fair share to support their local dispatch what happens when someone is kidnapped from a family that hasnt paid? When a criminal goes from NY to CA what system helps bring him back to be prosecuted? Good lord what if there wasnt a government to (eventually) catch on to bernia madoff? Eliminating government creates a world where anyone can start up a business because they say they know how to run it. All these government jobs are eliminated and then people find positions at these startup emt,school,police force, etc organizations that eventually fail. It's a big free for all where 900 insurance companies and banks start up everyday. Sure our government isnt perfect just like no government is, if things were run how they were supposed to they would be dam close. Unfortunately everyone who gets into a position of power exploits it for personal gain rather than for the greater good of the people.