Politics
Out of context: Reply #30611
- Started
- Last post
- 33,769 Responses
- ********3
@ukit
Back to the retirement stuff specifically and publicly funded care. How do you justify your desire for having that care paid for publicly for your parents/direct relatives so you don't have to deal with it? Is it one of those well others can take advantage of it too and will do so, so collectively it makes it normal and ok? I assume it's a very selfish motive you have. Which I understand and would have no problem with, but accept your selfishness fallout is forced on others as force. Even though u think your ideals are good for the people who dont' see it, its force.
I agree the same with you I want to not care for my ailing parents. Even though I'm one of three and the one who says as much, and I have full power of attorney. No idea why they chose me. Mention it as perspective. The problem which I think you are unapologetic for or even admit you understand, is your aims have so much collateral damage. Which you probably don't think about. And in all gov policy, and people, it usually is blocked vision of whom is stepping on whom. The damage comes in increased uncontrollable snowballing costs, taxes (direct and indirectly).
Your stance is correct that medical end of life care is a huge burden, but that is only because of the policies involved to alleviate that burden you don't want. And which in the age many policies were created was targeted toward the aging to alleviate burden on young ones while enjoying themselves. Funny how the marketing of policies change to current voters. Your medicare programs have ballooned health costs. Unlimited supply directed at care delaying death despite what we call living as any standard. A 80-90 year old might be a 5 million dollar billable client that lives in bed. That would never happen if it wasn't paid for collectively. Affordable burdens on families before our gov policies was far less burdensome. Plus the added perverse incentives of spending for elderly because of profit margins vs capital being put elsewhere. The collective money draws where the funding should go. Econ 101.
I don't think your ignorant of any of this... You just prefer it to not be true... You really want to have your cake and eat it too. And have any selfish desire unburdened by doubts and insecurities or funding. Prefer to float on the obama hope slogan vs the cruel reality. Are you a man who wants to live by hope but see reality with rational refusal (based on selfish desires), or blind just blind to it? Still not sure on that. There are those people who know theyre wrong but still go in the wrong direction. Are you one of those i guess is my question?
and for fun heres a milton friedman link about gov meddling
I find the economist and doctor make insightful points to early legislation which have only proven themselves true. Auto chic cant seem to grasp the idea that people can be free to choose the value of life over her idea of santuary of it. Again no gov collectivism is not much different than collectivism of bible. Same principle
- haha what...you are making this way too personal. I'm saying I think it's the best thing from the perspective of society overall to socialize the costs.yuekit
- True, in thee U.S. these programs are on an unsustainable path. But there are many other countries that have more socialized systems that pay lower costsyuekit
- and get better outcomes. So the idea that it can't work is not based in reality.yuekit
- Ultimately Milton Friedman is just one guy with an opinion. Good insights about some things maybe, but very ideological so he's always going to give the sameyuekit
- answer. I would prefer to look at what produces the best outcomes.yuekit
- Are you a man who wants to live by hope but see reality with rational refusal ... or blind just blind to it?monospaced
- When are you going to admit to and "accept your selfishness fallout is forced on others as force," yuekit?monospaced
- Good questinesyuekit
- because others have more stuff why cant i... its like a kids birthday party of different classes. other people have different cultures and different economies********
- its the bernie sanders praising venezuela. im all for you social systems that pay a lower cost. why i say open medicare and freeze it at its current percentage********
- of GDP. im sure the outcome won't be what you want. nor will it acknowledge the market forces that drive prices of end of life care up or culture. but it may********
- may help open peoples eyes since already medicare is larger portion of gdp than nations you mentioned********
- not about spending more liek bushs no child left behind but really understanding the gov systems and impacts on economy and human behavior********
- but if you want to look at what produces good outcomes. what are those? lets define those first and break it all down wether its really possible********
- the milton friedmans and hayeks were very socratic in knowing there own ignorance and to let markets decide. sometimes ideology is a good thing********
- haha and mono you forgot to quote the most important qualifying part "(based on selfish desires)". But good questions unanswered.********
- and back to ideology. why is it wrong if he always gives the same answer? it shows a strong fundamental understanding. people who flip flop on reasoning********
- are not a good thing... simply shows they have no ideology. which means no belief... i think its obvious he has an ideology, based on reason********
- and thats the difference, not what he wishes was ideal, but with a great understanding of economics and intuitiveness of human behavior********
- I just get this vibe that to accept the idea the possibility of a socialist utopia, or just more free shit, is not an option for you no matter the evidence********
- or it could also be the possibility that ppl are different. that you would love a chinese/norwegian system of central control providing basic stuff********
- but always at their whims. to me that is hell. i want independence and freedom. i want opportunity room to grow which means fail, means be broke. what is life********
- without strife, what does it mean to learn if you can exchange every turd for a pepperoni (tom robbins said it better)********
- if you are a person who is fully comfortable living under rule of thumb with promised benefits why try to force your creed on my types?********
- why does religion try to force rules upon gays. collectivism rule is always about domination of the minority or what they can get away with********
- me i side with individualism which is not dark age shit. but enlightenment period.... i guess basically if you prefer to live in a society that can socialize********
- shit you don't want it best to keep it free. voluntary. probably wont be successful but some voluntary collectives are. look at REI********
- i just think your logic is flawed or you're not being honest with intentions. do we need a dictator for social ends or voluntary?********
- and on a side note.. look at social media. has it been beneficial or has it helped reduce discourse to beating of chest and peacock feathers********
- has things become derivative and boring. a large socialism network or any group is not really different than a monopoly. a monopoly never really created outside********
- gov control, because market forces are solid in democratizing what people want far better than voting********
- thinking more about types of people. in all human history all grievances are probably derived of 2 binary types of people. create wars and chaos********
- those comfortable with chaos and no control and those who want dominion over everything if its only in their heads. individualists vs collectivists. many fall********
- into mid sections and choose blindly outside any reason of why. usually hope they can mask greed for greater good. but maybe evolution has evolved that way********
- to challenge and cycle. why our republic is geared to weather the storms of mob rule and and have a balance of power.********