Politics
Out of context: Reply #8416
- Started
- Last post
- 33,772 Responses
- ********0
Blueone
On the whole government is bad deal your right government is a must in order to protect individuals rights from gangs, collective, parties, countries.... masses with power that can violate the rights of others. Gov's are bad when they allow majority rule to violate the minority rights. Your libertarian utopia is on the opposite spectrum of facism/socialism. Socialism/facism fails becuase people arent slaves and it ends up being thug rule. Libertarian utopias fail becuase peopel cant handle freedom and dont understand ethics/rights and revert back to their collective ways of trying to rule through numbers. I mean if your weak lazy are incapable, but becuase youre human you have an instinct to survive you will likely gang in numbers form unions and such and try to live that way. Its liek prison dynamic. And like u said its a unreachable utopia right now, maybe forever as a limit to our species. So right now we try to float in the middle, but in no way can i see trying to maintain freedom as bad idea, especially when the other leads to soc/fac.The whole trump thing is correct, gov protects rights and doesnt let warlord brutes and thugs run free to violate rights of others.
The organization portion is a bit off. And sketchy around the issues of social justice to vitality and politics. This is were it started sounding liek jsutification for groups to have rights over other smaller groups. And the vitality also being medical care it was makign me think population control eugenics kind of talk. Becuase its either let natural selection/capitalism work its magic, or groups deciding the methods of natural selection through political power. And organization is greta like on a basketball team or war strategy, but way different then a organization with power over a smaller organization. i may jsut not be understanding you on this and leading me to fill in the blanks to make sense.
And for a democracy to work individuals have to have their rights protected at all times, and never allow a majority to claim rights over a minority, becuase groups dont have rights, only the rights of the individuals. The beasts are the groups liek religious groups, political parties and such that try to impsoe their collective whims on individuals. If you simply place highest regard on an individuals rights you shouldnt have to worry about beasts.
And yes soemhtign has to be done. ponyboy is absolutely correct we need to act to cut costs. i.e. better judicial system that doesnt offer XXX million for a bumbled surgury, which makes insurance companies charge doctors far more and then charge consumer more making our insurance go up. If you had caps it would likely bring costs down...unless there all bitches, and what i ahve been seeign is business raise price in hard times and then they dont lower them back, becuase its common sense now if no one adjsuts they keep their higher profit margins, and becuase of companies being owned by boards and investors they dont compete becuase then they will lose their jobs becuase competition means smaller profit margins. so id suggest in that case layign otu incentives to those that compete, but be really careful and dotn add to soem bubble. stuff liek that. becuase thats the only "real" solution. and by real i mean becuase tossign ti on the gov shouldnt be an option.
And by rights blue im talking private property rights, your earned cash. A majority shouldnt be able to vote for the minority to help pay for 1/5 the national bill. Especially when its a failing business model. Look at social security/medicare/medicaid. The expoential growth of the population cannot afford it, costs go up, tech makes peopel die slower. Most ill cannot contribute anymore or pay, so the system hemorages money until it needs to ration or practice eugenics. If this is untrue social security should be a success. So as we advance and grow our limited resources get taxed and we're faced with letting natural selection play out or giving up a very large amount of freedom, and committing ourselves to poverty for all. It is socialized medicine, and the collapse of socialism applies to the medical program. And i know the dems say its reform, or a few tweaks, but really theyre idiots who want to lay out the foundation, and when it does collapse cause of supply/demand, they wont pull it, becuase it will be too hard to remove and theyll switch to eugenics.
and on rights this is a lot mroe money and freedom then payign gas tax for the roads i use, or for education which keeps mobs of uneducated kids from forming gangs and robbing my house while im at work. And trying to form a more enlightened society of individuals. Sure gov has stepped on the rights in the past of many people, but those past grievances dont add to justify this large of one. One dick move doesnt make another larger dick move cool.
And then also being one of the last mostly free medical economies, we're also looking at innovation problems. Other countries are usually a few years behind, and im guessing its until we perfect the new things and then they pick them up.
Its admirable to want to help people, and any individual that wants to is free to do so, but no laws should be made to force people to. And something to keep in mind huxley wrote was peoples good intentions usually have bad consequences. People wanted to cure malaria becuase they didnt liek to see people die from it. So they cured it and the popualtion grew without resources, knowledge and such and was more starved and impoverished then ever, lowering the survival rate for everyone, quality of life, and just leading to slow death. Moral of the story is to work out the consequences of what you perceive as a good intention.
well im sick of this shit